Translation machine having a function of deriving two or more syntaxes from one original sentence and giving precedence to a selected one of the syntaxes

ABSTRACT

A translation machine is arranged to derive two or more syntaxes from one original sentence, determine which of the syntaxes is the most approximate according to a syntax priority rule given by a user or a manufacturer and output a translated sentence based on the most approximate syntax. The translation machine includes a memory, a translating module and a main CPU as main components. The memory serves to store a partial structure of each syntax and a syntax priority rule containing a numerical value indicating a priority of the partial structure and an incidental condition of the syntax. The translating module serves to collide the syntax priority rule stored in the memory with the syntax of the original sentence and giving a proper evaluating value to the syntax of the original sentence. The main CPU serves to output the translated sentences on the syntaxes derived from the original sentence according to their larger evaluating values.

BACKGROUND OF THE INVENTION

1. Field of the Invention

The present invention relates to a translation machine which is capableof building two or more syntaxes of a target language from one inputtedsentence of a source language, and more particularly to a translationmachine which provides a capability of learning a syntax priority forindicating which of the syntaxes is closer to the desired syntax of asource language.

2. Description of the Related Art

A translation machine known by the inventors is, in general, arranged tohave an input unit such as a keyboard for inputting an object sentenceof a source language, a translating module for executing an actualtranslation of the inputted sentence, a central processing unit (mainCPU) for controlling the translation module, and a main memory forstoring dictionaries such as a main dictionary and a user dictionary,grammatical rules, and tree-structure converting rules. The inputtedobject sentence is sent to the translating module under the control ofthe main CPU and is translated into the target sentence by referring tothe dictionaries, the grammatical rules and the tree-structureconverting rules.

This translation machine analyzes the syntax based on the parts ofspeech obtained as a result of analyzing the morphemes of the objectsentence and by referring to the dictionaries and the grammatical rulesand, in many cases, builds two or more syntaxes for one object sentence.Hence, for one object sentence, two or more translated sentences may benormally generated.

On the other hand, as a realistic problem, the translation machine hasthe following outputting types for the translated sentence.

(a) For one original sentence, just one translated sentence isoutputted.

(b) For one original sentence, just one translated sentence isoutputted, however, another translated sentence may be seriallyoutputted by a user's operation of the keyboard.

(c) For one original sentence, two or more translated sentences areoutputted at one time.

If the translation machine uses the output type of (a), the translatedsentence appearing for the first is required to be the best of thetranslated sentences.

If the translation machine uses such a user interface as outputting twoor more translated sentences for one original sentence such as theoutput types (b) and (c), more desirable translated sentences arerequired to be outputted in sequence. If the used user interface is thetype (b), the most desirable one of the translated sentences to begenerated by the translation machine should be outputted at first. Then,more desirable ones should be outputted in sequence.

If the user interface is the type (c), more desirable translatedsentences should be outputted on the display in sequence. For example,more desirable translated sentences should appear from the upper tolower locations on the display.

For this purpose, if two or more syntaxes, that is, translated sentencesmay be derived from one original sentence, it is necessary to define thepriority range of the translated sentences by comparing the translatedsentences with each other in light of the translation level.

If the user interface is the type (a), only the translated sentence onthe top priority in the defined priority range appears.

Hence, to define the priority range, the following methods have beenknown.

(1) Semantic Analysis

(2) Modifying Relation

(3) Describing Sequence of Grammatical Rules

(4) Scoring of Grammatical Rules

For method (1), semantic analysis, the concrete method is arranged towrite information about a semantic category in a word dictionary andprevent use of such a syntax as having the modified words with differentsemantic categories when defining the modification between the words inanalyzing the syntax.

For method (2), modifying relation, this method is a kind of semanticanalysis and is arranged to specify a word to be modified with anotherword and describe it in the dictionary. When defining the modificationbetween the words in analyzing the syntax, if a certain syntax has adifferent word to be modified from the description of the dictionary,this syntax is not used.

For method (3), describing sequence of grammatical rules, the"grammatical rules" are the rules for analyzing the syntax indicated intable 2 (to be described later).

By adjusting the describing sequence of the grammatical rules in thedictionary, it is possible to change how easily each of the grammaticalrules may apply to the translation. This results in controlling theeasiness with which one or more specific syntaxes may be generated to acertain extent. The easiness with which the syntax is generated may beconsidered to be a basis on which the priority is defined for thesyntax.

For method (4), scoring of grammatical rules, by scoring each of thegrammatical rules, the total score or the average score of the usedgrammatical rules is used.

When two or more syntaxes may be built for one original sentence, themethods for defining the priority between these syntaxes have beendescribed. However, these methods have the following shortcomings.

At first, the semantic analysis including a check for a modifyingrelation is considered. The semantic analysis is a significant process.It is effective to determine that an incorrect syntax is not used on thebasis of the semantic analysis. In general, however, the semanticanalysis in the translation machine requires a complicated process and along execution time. Because many syntaxes are normally derived from theoriginal sentence, it is not realistic to execute semantic analysis inlight of the long processing time, which would be required. In the caseof using the semantic analysis, it is preferable to define which of thesyntaxes should take precedence at a previous stage using a simplermethod (simpler than semantic analysis.

Further, the known translation machine employs the method for using thegrammatical rules indicated in table 2 (to be described later) fordefining the priority range of the syntaxes. However, each of thegrammatical rules for syntactic analysis is for only a part of theoverall syntax. Hence, if a priority coefficient is given to such agrammatical rule, the value derived on the coefficient does notcorrectly reflect the priority syntax if viewed as an overall sentenceor a large part of the sentence. This is also a shortcoming.

The translation machine known by the inventors is, in general, arrangedto allow a user to partially change the operation of the machine forachieving a personalized user interface. The contents which can bechanged are as follows;

(a) A new word or idiom in the dictionary provided in the translationmachine can be registered.

(b) Under a specified incidental condition, a translated part of a wordor idiom is outputted.

(c) Controlling the level of completely at which the syntactic analysisis executed.

As mentioned above, in the known translation machine, the user maychange only the translated part of a word or idiom or adjust the generaloperation of a certain process in the translating process. In general,when translating a longer original sentence with a larger scaled syntax,by totally grasping the syntax, a human translator (not using a machine)knows from experience the general syntax of the original sentence.

Hence, by extracting experience rules depending on only the form of thesyntax and systematizing them, in the machine translation, theseexperience rules may be powerful information for defining the priorityone of the syntaxes derived from one original sentence.

However, since the known translation machine does not use the foregoingexperience information, if the user having excellent grammatical skilldesires the translation machine to select his or her desired syntax forobtaining a better translated sentence, his or her desire is notdirectly reflected when using the known translation machine.

That is, the known translation machine allows the user to partiallychange the translating operation. However, the user's possibleadjustment is limited to the word or idiom level or the general trend ofa part of the translating process. The user cannot choose a specificsyntax to be used by the machine.

SUMMARY OF THE INVENTION

The present invention provides a translation machine arranged on asyntax priority learning system, which is capable of generally derivingone or more syntaxes of an original sentence to be translated andexecuting the translating process based on the fitness information abouteach syntax.

The present invention also provides a translation machine which iscapable of defining which of the syntaxes is correct based on the purelygrammatical information when the syntaxes are competing in thetranslating process.

According to a first aspect of the present invention, a translationmachine having a capability of deriving two or more syntaxes from anoriginal sentence, includes: storing means for storing a syntax priorityrule including a partial structure of each syntax, a numerical valueindicating a priority of the partial structure, and an incidentalcondition of the syntax; colliding and estimating means for collidingthe syntax priority rule stored in the storing means with the syntacticstructure of the original sentence and estimating the syntacticstructure; and control means for outputting a translated sentencecreated on the syntactic structure in the precedence order of theestimation.

According to a second aspect of the present invention, a translationmachine arranged to have a morphological analyzing unit for dividing aninputted sentence into morphemes by using a dictionary and obtainingparts of speech about the morphemes, a syntactic analyzing unit foranalyzing the syntax of a morpheme train divided by the morphologicalanalyzing unit by using the dictionary and grammatical rules, aconverting unit for converting the structure of the syntax obtained bythe syntactic analyzing unit into a syntactic structure of a targetlanguage, and a translated sentence generating unit for generating atranslated sentence according to the syntactic structure of the targetlanguage obtained by the converting unit and provide a function oflearning a syntax priority, includes: converting means for obtaining allor some of syntactic structures if two or more syntaxes may be derivedfrom the inputted original sentence; syntax storing means for storingall the syntactic structures derived by the converting means at onetime; selecting means for selecting one or more proper or impropersyntactic structures from the syntactic structures stored in the syntaxstoring means, based on the user's will; means for converting theoverall one sentence or a part of the sentence specified by the user ora mechanism provided in the translation machine itself into apredetermined syntax priority rule about the syntactic structures storedin the syntax storing means, for generating a syntax priority rule basedon the information indicating about whether or not the syntacticstructure is selected by the user in the selecting means; prioritystoring means for recording parts of one or more syntaxes, and anypieces of syntax priority rules composed of an index indicating aspecific desired one of the structures or a numerical value specified asthe desired one; estimating means for giving any estimating value toeach of the syntactic structures by referring to the informationrecorded in the priority storing means for each of the syntacticstructures when analyzing the syntax or after a part or the overall ofthe syntactic structure is completed; and control means for comparing atranslated sentence on the syntactic structure with a higher estimatingvalue given by the estimating means with another translated sentence onthe syntactic structure with a lower estimating value and outputting theformer in the precedence order.

According to a third aspect of the present invention, a translationmachine having a capability of deriving two or more syntaxes from anoriginal sentence, includes: storing means for storing informationstanding for an index about fitness of a syntactic structure; inputmeans for inputting, modifying and deleting the information to be storedin the storing means; and determining means for referring to theinformation stored in the storing means when obtaining two or moresyntaxes from the original sentence and determining the precedence orderof the syntaxes.

In the function of the translation machine according to the first aspectof the invention, the storing means serves to store the syntax priorityrules including a partial structure of a syntax, a numerical valueindicating a priority degree of the partial structure and the incidentalcondition of the syntax. The estimated values adding means serves tocollide the syntax priority rules stored in the storing means with thesyntactic structure of the inputted sentence and giving an estimatingvalue to the syntactic structure. The control means serves to output thetranslated sentence generated on the syntactic structure according tothe higher estimating values.

Hence, when deriving two or more syntactic structures from one originalsentence, this translation machine enables to automatically define thefitting sequence among these syntactic structures and swiftly output themost approximate syntactic structure and the translated counterpart.

In the function of the translation machine according to the secondaspect of the invention, when two or more syntactic structures may bebuilt at a time or serially from one original sentence, to some extent,whether or not any of the syntactic structures is correct may bedetermined irrespective of the content of the sentence. That is, whenthe syntaxes are competing in translating one original sentence, in someforms of the syntaxes, whether or not the syntax is correct is allowedto be experientially determined only from the purely grammaticalinformation without using the other information such as meaninginformation.

Hence, this translation machine operates to determine which of thecompeting syntaxes is the most approximate based on the fitness aboutthe forms of the syntaxes after two or more syntactic structures aregenerated at one time or serially as a result of analyzing the syntax.The information required for obtaining this "fitness" is allowed to bederived by extracting the syntax to be rank first from the translatedsentences selected by the user when executing the translation before andincluding the syntax as a rule.

This translation machine operates to output two or more translatedsentences from one original sentence, one of which translated sentencesis selected by a user. Of the two or more syntaxes on which the two ormore translated sentences are generated, the syntax of the translatedsentence selected by the user is determined as the most approximate andis included as a rule. The rule is stored in the priority storing means.And, when deriving two or more syntactic structures from one originalsentence, by referring to the rules generated as described above in thepast, it is possible to make sure that any one of the obtained syntaxescoincides with the syntax described in any one of the rules. If so, byplacing the syntax coinciding with the rule on the priority or loweringthe priority level of the syntactic structure, the priority (outputsequence or location, etc.) on which tile translated sentence isoutputted is defined on the syntactic structure.

With this operation, as the translation machine uses for a longer time,more knowledge based on the experience of a human translator isreflected on the fitness of a syntax. As a result, when deriving two ormore syntaxes from one original sentence, the most approximate syntax isautomatically defined from the derived syntaxes. Moreover, the mostapproximate syntax and the translated counterpart are swiftly outputtedand the translated counterpart based on the unfit syntax is suppressedto be outputted.

In the function of the translation machine according to the third aspectof the invention, the storing means serves to store information standingfor an index about fitness of the syntax. The input means serves toinput the information rules to be stoned in the storing means, modify ordelete them. The determining means serves to refer to the informationstored in the stoning means when deriving two or more syntaxes from oneoriginal sentence and determine the ranking sequence of the syntaxes.

Hence, when deriving two or more syntaxes from one original sentence,the fitting sequence of the syntaxes is allowed to be automaticallydefined. As a result, the most approximate syntax and the translatedsentence based on the syntax can be obtained.

Further objects and advantages of the present invention will be apparentfrom the following description of the preferred embodiments of theinvention as illustrated in the accompanying drawings.

BRIEF DESCRIPTION OF THE DRAWINGS

FIG. 1 is a block diagram showing a translation machine according to afirst embodiment of the present invention;

FIG. 2 is an explanatory view showing a translating process executed inthe translation machine shown in FIG. 1;

FIG. 3 is a functional diagram showing a translating module provided inthe translation machine shown in FIG. 1;

FIG. 4 is a block diagram showing an arrangement of the translatingmodule shown in FIG. 3;

FIG. 5 is an explanatory view showing the content of a buffer A shown inFIG. 4;

FIG. 6 is an explanatory view showing the content of a buffer B shown inFIG. 4;

FIG. 7 is an explanatory view showing the content of a buffer C shown inFIG. 4;

FIG. 8 is an explanatory view showing the content of a buffer D shown inFIG. 4;

FIG. 9 is an explanatory view showing the content of a buffer E shown inFIG. 4;

FIG. 10 is a view showing a parsing tree derived by the translationmachine shown in FIG. 1;

FIGS. 11a-k are views showing a storage form of the parsing treetranslated in two or more ways in a buffer;

FIG. 12 is an explanatory view showing how to write a priorityinterpretation rule;

FIG. 13 is an explanatory view showing how to write a priorityinterpretation rule;

FIG. 14 is an explanatory view showing how to write a priorityinterpretation rule;

FIG. 15 is an explanatory view showing how to write a priorityinterpretation rule;

FIG. 16 is a view showing a parsing tree standing for a priorityinterpretation rule which may apply to the translation machine shown inFIG. 1;

FIG. 17 is a view showing a tabular form of a parsing tree standing fora priority interpretation rule which may apply to the translationmachine shown in FIG. 1;

FIG. 18 is a view showing a parsing tree standing for a priorityinterpretation rule which may apply to the translation machine shown inFIG. 1 and another parsing tree competing therewith;

FIG. 19 is a view showing a parsing tree standing for a priorityinterpretation rule which may apply to the translation machine shown inFIG. 1 and another parsing tree competing therewith;

FIG. 20 is a view showing a parsing tree standing for a priorityinterpretation rule which may apply to the translation machine shown inFIG. 1 and another parsing tree competing therewith;

FIG. 21 is a view showing a parsing tree standing for a priorityinterpretation rule which may apply to the translation machine shown inFIG. 1 and another parsing tree competing therewith;

FIG. 22 is a view showing a parsing tree standing for a priorityinterpretation rule which may apply to the translation machine shown inFIG. 1 and another parsing tree competing therewith;

FIG. 23 is a view showing a parsing tree standing for a priorityinterpretation rule which may apply to the translation machine shown inFIG. 1 and another parsing tree competing therewith;

FIG. 24 is an explanatory view showing a process for calculating apriority value in the translation machine shown in FIG. 1;

FIG. 25 is an explanatory view showing a process for calculating apriority value in the translation machine shown FIG. 1;

FIG. 26 is an explanatory view showing a process for calculating apriority value in the translation machine shown in FIG. 1;

FIG. 27 is an explanatory view showing a process for calculating apriority value in the translation machine shown in FIG. 1;

FIG. 28(i) & (ii) is a flowchart for describing a translating processimplemented in the translation machine shown in FIG. 1;

FIG. 29 is a view showing a parsing tree derived by a translationmachine according to a second embodiment of the present invention;

FIG. 30 is a view showing a transformation of the parsing tree shown inFIG. 29;

FIG. 31 is a view showing another transformation of the parsing treeshown in FIG. 29;

FIG. 32 is a view showing another transformation of the parsing treeshown in FIG. 29;

FIG. 33 is a view showing another transformation of the parsing treeshown in FIG. 29;

FIG. 34 is a view showing another transformation of the parsing treeshown in FIG. 29;

FIG. 35 is a view showing another transformation of the parsing treeshown in FIG. 29;

FIG. 36 is a view showing another transformation of the parsing treeshown in FIG. 29;

FIG. 37 is a view showing another transformation of the parsing treeshown in FIG. 29;

FIG. 38a(i) & (ii) is a flowchart showing a translating process executedin the translation machine according to the second embodiment;

FIG. 38b(i) & (ii) is a flowchart showing a succeeding translatingprocess executed in the translation machine according to the secondembodiment;

FIG. 39 is a block diagram showing a translating module included in thetranslation machine according to the second embodiment;

FIG. 40 is a view showing an overall parsing tree derived by thetranslation machine according to the second embodiment;

FIG. 41 is a view showing another overall parsing tree derived by thetranslation machine according to the second embodiment;

FIG. 42 is a view showing another overall parsing tree derived by thetranslation machine according to the second embodiment;

FIG. 43 is a view showing another overall parsing tree derived by thetranslation machine according to the second embodiment;

FIG. 44 is a block diagram showing a concrete arrangement of atranslation machine according to a third embodiment of the presentinvention;

FIG. 45a is a flowchart showing an operation of the translation machineshown in FIG. 44;

FIG. 45b is a flowchart showing an operation of the translation machineshown in FIG. 44;

FIG. 46 is an explanatory view showing an example of a parsing tree usedin the translation machine shown in FIG. 44; FIG. 47 is an explanatoryview showing one part of the parsing tree to be translated into two ormore ways by the translation machine shown in FIG. 44;

FIG. 48 is an explanatory view showing a form of a priorityinterpretation rule used in the translation machine shown in FIG. 44;

FIG. 49 is an explanatory view showing another part of the parsing treeto be translated into two or more ways by the translation machine shownin FIG. 44;

FIG. 50 is an explanatory view showing another part of the parsing treeto be translated into two or more ways;

FIG. 51 is an explanatory view showing another part of the parsing treeto be translated into two or more ways;

FIG. 52 is an explanatory view showing another part of the parsing treeto be translated into two or more ways;

FIG. 53 is an explanatory view showing another part of the parsing treeto be translated into two or more ways;

FIG. 54 is an explanatory view showing another part of the parsing treeto be translated into two or more ways; and

FIG. 55 is an explanatory view showing another part of the parsing treeto be translated into two or more ways.

DESCRIPTION OF THE PREFERRED EMBODIMENTS

At first, the description will be oriented to a translation machineaccording to a first embodiment of the present invention. In this orlater embodiments, it is assumed that a source language is English and atarget language is Japanese.

FIG. 1 is a block diagram showing the translation machine according tothe first embodiment. The translation machine shown in FIG. 1 isarranged to have a main CPU 11, a main memory 12, a display device 13, akeyboard 14, a Translating module 15, AND a memory 16 for storingdictionaries, grammatical rules, tree-structure converting rules and soforth.

The display device 13 may be a cathode-ray tube (CRT) or a liquidcrystal display (LCD).

Next, the operation of the translation machine shown in FIG. 1 will bedescribed.

The translating module 15 operates to receive a sentence described by asource language (referred to simply as a source language ), translatethe source sentence into a sentence described by a target language(referred to simply as a target language), and output the targetlanguage.

The source language inputted from the keyboard 14 is sent to thetranslating module 15 under the control of the main CPU 11. Thetranslating module 15 operates to translate the inputted source languageinto the target language in the below-described manner by using thedictionaries, the grammatical rules and the tree-structure convertingrules. The translated result is temporarily stored in the main memory 12and is displayed on the display device 13. The main memory 12 may beused as a register memory and a display buffer when executing variousprograms.

The machine translation executed in the translating module 15 may bedivided into the following analyzing stages as shown in FIG. 2.

As shown in FIG. 2, when the source language is entered into thetranslating module 15, the source language is analyzed serially in theorder of a dictionary consulting stage at a level L1, a morphologicalanalyzing stage at a level L2, a syntactic analyzing stage at a levelL3, and so forth.

The machine translation is divided into two systems based on theanalyzing level.

One system is arranged to analyze the source language up to the concept(referred to as an interlingua) independently of the source language andthe target language and then generate the target language in the orderof the concept to a context generating stage at a level L7, a semanticgenerating stage at a level LB, a syntactic generating stage at a levelL9, and a morphological generating stage at a level L10. This system isreferred to as a pivot system.

The other system is arranged to analyze the source language at any oneof the morphological analyzing stage of the level L2, the syntacticanalyzing stage of the level LB, the semantic analyzing stage of thelevel L4, and the content analyzing stage of the level L5 for obtainingan internal structure of the source language for the correspondingstage, convert the internal structure into the counterpart of the targetlanguage at the corresponding stage, and then generate the targetlanguage from the converted internal structure. This system is referredto as a transfer system.

Herein, the description will be oriented to each of the analyses L1 toL5 shown in FIG. 2.

At the dictionary consulting stage of the level L1 and the morphologicalanalyzing stage of the level L2, the operation is executed to consultthe dictionary stored in the memory 16 (see FIG. 1), divide the inputtedsentence(s) into a morpheme train (word train), obtain the grammaticalinformation like a part of speech and its translated counterpart abouteach word, and analyze each word for searching a tense, a person, and anumber. At the syntactic analyzing stage of the level LB, the operationis executed to determine the syntax of the sentence (parsing tree) suchas how the words are modified in the sentence. At the semantic analyzingstage of the level L4, the operation is executed to determine a correctone(s) of two or more analyzed syntaxes in light of the meaning. At thecontext analyzing stage of the level L5, the operation is executed tounderstand the topic of the sentence(s) and eliminate the omittedportion and the ambiguous portion from the sentence based on the topic.

In this embodiment, the translating module 15 is arranged to execute theanalysis from the level L1 to at least the level L3, the syntacticanalyzing stage. That is, the translating module 15 means a part shownin FIG. 3.

FIG. 4 is a block diagram showing an arrangement of the translatingmodule 15. FIGS. 5 to 9 show the contents of the buffers A to E shown inFIG. 4 provided when the English sentence of "This is a pen." (originalsentence 1) is translated into the Japanese sentence.

Later, the description will be oriented to the translation from Englishto Japanese as referring to FIGS. 3 to 9.

As shown in FIG. 5, the read original sentence is stored in the buffer Ashown in FIG. 4. Under the control of the translating CPU 151 based onthe translating program 152, the dictionary consulting and morphologicalanalyzing unit shown in FIG. 3 operates to obtain information about atranslated counterpart of each word composing the original sentencestored in the buffer A as referring to the dictionary shown in memory16. The information is stored in the buffer B shown in FIG. 4.

For example, the information about a part of speech, which correspondsto part of the information, is stored as indicated in FIG. 6. The word"this" has two or more parts of speech. However, the syntactic analyzingunit 18 shown in FIG. 3 operates to uniquely define the part of speechof "this".

The syntactic analyzing unit 18 operates to determine the parsing treeindicating how the words are modified as shown in FIG. 7 by referring tothe dictionary and the grammatical rules stored in the memory 16. Theparsing tree is stored in the buffer C shown in FIG. 4.

This parsing tree is determined as follows. That is, from thegrammatical rules stored in the memory 16, the following rules areobtained.

Sentence→Subject+Predicate

Subject→Noun Phrase

Predicate→Verb+Noun Phrase

Noun Phrase→Pronoun

Noun Phrase→Article+Noun

For example, the first rule stands for "a sentence consists of a subjectand a predicate".

Based on these rules, the parsing tree is determined. In the parsingtree shown in FIG. 7, the grammatical indexes ("Pronoun", "Verb","Article", "Nouns" and so forth in FIG. 7) immediately above the actualwords ("this", "is" and so forth in FIG. 7) are referred to as ♭terminalsymbols". The grammatical indexes except them ("Sentence", "Subject","Predicate", "Noun Phrase" and so forth in FIG. 7) are referred to as"non-terminal symbols". The terminal symbols are generally equivalent tothe concepts referred to as "part of speech".

As mentioned above, the grammatical rule is required to have anon-terminal symbol at its left-hand (the left side located from anarrow).

The converting unit 19 (see FIG. 3) operates to convert the structure ofthe parsing tree (see FIG. 7) for the English sentence into thestructure for the Japanese as shown in FIG. 8 based on tree structureconverting rules. The obtained result is stored in the buffer D shown inFIG. 4.

The translated sentence generating unit 20 (see FIG. 3) operates to adda proper particle "ha" or a proper auxiliary verb to the obtainedJapanese characters "Kote Pen De Aru" for completing the Japanesesentence as shown in FIG. 9. This Japanese sentence is stored in thebuffer

The Japanese sentence "Kote Ha Pen De Aru" is outputted from thetranslating module 15 and then is stored in the main memory 12 anddisplayed on the display device 13 at a time.

Next, the description will be oriented to the translating method used inthe translation machine according to this embodiment as referring toFIGS. 10 to 28.

In this embodiment, "fitness of the syntax itself" is referred to as"syntax priority" and selection of a fit syntax based on the syntaxpriority is referred to as "interpretation of syntax priority" or simply"priority interpretation".

Next, the method for defining the syntax priority will be described.

The grammatical rules stored in the memory 16 (see FIG. 4) are listed inTable 2. Table 1 lists separation of the grammatical indexes used in thegrammatical rules listed in Table 2 into the terminal symbols and thenon-terminal symbols.

Table 1

End Indexes: Noun, Pronoun, Article, Preposition, EquivalentConjunction, Verb, Period

Non-end Indexes: Noun Phrase, Preposition Phrase, Verb Phrase, MainClause

Table 2

(r1) Noun Phrase→Noun

(r2) Noun Phrase→Pronoun

(r3) Noun Phrase→Article+Noun Phrase

(r4) Preposition Phrase→Preposition+Noun Phrase

(r5) Noun Phrase→Noun Phrase+Preposition Phrase

(r6) Noun Phrase→Noun Phrase+Equivalent Conjunction+Noun Phrase

(r7) Verb Phrase→Verb+Noun Phrase

(r8) Verb Phrase→Verb+Noun Phrase+Preposition Phrase

(r9) Verb Phrase→Verb+Preposition Phrase

(r10) Main Clause→Noun Phrase+Verb Phrase

(r11) Sentence→Main Clause+Period

In such a translation machine, an original sentence "I bought films forthe camera and tapes for the VTR. (Original Sentence 2)" is entered.This sentence is subject to the morphological analysis and then thesyntactic analysis according to the grammatical rules listed in Table 2.The resulting parsing tree is made to be the tree shown in FIG. 10. Forthe original sentence 2, the parsing tree is not uniquely defined onlyby the grammatical rules listed in Table 2.

The part of "bought films for the camera and tapes for the VTR (partialclause 3)" may be analyzed into two or more ways. As shown in FIG. 10,the partial clause in which two or more parsing trees may be derived isnot represented in the form of the parsing tree but in the form of atriangle covering the corresponding part.

In the translation machine according to this embodiment, the parsingtree stored in the buffer C of FIG. 4 takes the form as shown in FIGS.11a to 11k, which indicates only the part corresponding to the partialclause 3 in which the structure is not uniquely defined, of all the dataabout the parsing trees derived by syntax-analyzing the originalsentence 2.

As will be understood from FIGS. 11a to 11k, if the partial clause 3 issyntax-analyzed according to the grammatical rules indicated by Table 2,the number of the resulting solutions is 11. The buffer C enables tostore all the data about the eleven parsing trees at one time.

The priority about each of these eleven parsing trees is defined inlight of the form of the parsing tree itself. This method for definingthe priority is the syntax priority interpretation introduced by theinvention. When executing the syntactic analysis based on the syntaxpriority interpretation, in addition to the grammatical rules listed inTable 2, the syntax priority rules listed in Table 3 are used.

                  TABLE 3    ______________________________________    (yl) Noun Phrase (Noun Phrase (Noun Phrase + Preposition    Phrase (Preposition + *) + Equivalent Conjunction + Noun    Phrase (Noun Phrase + Preposition Phrase (Preposition + *)))    Incidental Condition: The surface layer of the fifth    element is equivalent to that of the eleventh element.    -> Priority Magnification 2.0    (y2)    -> Priority Magnification 1.5    (y3)    -> Priority Magnification 3.0    ______________________________________

The syntax priority rule is a rule in which if the group of indexesunder one non-terminal symbol (this is a non-terminal symbol A) includedin the parsing tree meet an incidental condition, a certain priorityvalue is given to the non-terminal symbol (non-terminal symbol A)located at the vertex of the index group.

Each syntax priority rule includes a format indicated by (y1) of Table3. The part before an arrow means the left hand of the rule, that is,"Noun Phrase (Noun Phrase (Noun Phrase+Preposition Phrase(Preposition+*))+Equivalent Conjunction+Noun Phrase (NounPhrase+Preposition Phrase (Preposition Phrase+*))) Incidental Condition: The fifth element is equivalent to the eleventh element in the surfacelayer". The part after the arrow means the right hand of the rule, thatis, "Priority Magnification 2.0".

In the left hand of the rule (y1) of Table 3, the item of "IncidentalCondition" exists. In actuality, however, this item is not essential inthe left hand of the syntax priority rule.

Then, the description will be oriented to the meaning of the left handof the syntax priority rule.

The part except the "incidental condition" in the left hand stands forthe form of a partial analyzing tree consisting of a certainnon-terminal symbol and some non-terminal or terminal symbols locatedunder the non-terminal symbol in the overall parsing tree.

How to stand for the form of the partial analyzing tree in thisembodiment will be described as referring to FIGS. 12 to 15.

The index marked between a pair of parentheses "()" means an index at alower node by one than the index located in the immediately left-hand ofthe parenthesis "(". For example, the rule indicated by A(B) means onlythe index B exists at a lower position by one than the index A. Further,a plus symbol "++ means an index located in the immediately left-hand ofthe plus symbol "+" and an index located in the immediately right-handof the plus symbol shares an index at a lower position by one than thesetwo indexes located in the left-hand and the right-hand of the plussymbol "+". For example, the rule of A(B+C) is, as shown in FIG. 12,means the indexes B and C exist at a lower position by one than thenon-terminal symbol A. FIG. 13 shows the form of the partial parsingtree as shown in FIG. 12 given when the tree is stored in the buffer Cshown in FIG. 4.

By using the parentheses "("and")" and the plus symbol "+", it ispossible to represent the form of a parsing tree as a one-line range ofend/non-terminal symbols however complicated the tree is. For example,the parsing tree shown in FIG. 14 is represented by A(B(C+D)+E+F).Further, FIG. 15 shows the form of the parsing tree as shown in FIG. 14given when the tree is stored in the buffer C of FIG. 4.

It will be understood from the above description that the syntaxpriority rule (y1) of Table 3 indicates the parsing tree as shown inFIG. 16. FIG. 17 shows the form of the parsing tree shown in FIG. 16given when it is stored in the buffer C shown in FIG. 4.

The syntax priority rule (y1) of Table 3 means experience rules on theEnglish interpretation. For example, consider the following Englishpartial clause.

    "P of Q and R of S (partial clause 4)"

wherein P, Q, R and S stand for an actual English word or an Englishword train, respectively, it is assumed that P and R stand for a noun ora noun phrase. In the assumption, it is experientially known that thecorrect translation of the partial clause 4 is not such that "Q and R"modifies "P" and "S" modifies the overall "Q and R" modified by "P" or"S" modifies "Q and R" and "P" modifies the overall "Q and R" modifiedby "S" but such that "Q" modifies "P" and "S" modifies "R".

In many cases, therefore, the correct parsing tree standing for thepartial clause 4 should be analyzed not as shown in FIGS. 18 and 19 butas shown in FIG. 20. However, this analysis does not always hold true tosuch a partial clause as "P of Q and R on S (partial clause 5)".

Further, consider the following English partial clause "T for U or V forW (partial clause 6). Like the partial clause 4, T, U, V and W eachstand for an actual English word or an English word train. Assuming thatT and V are a noun or a noun phrase, it is experientially known that thecorrect translation of the partial clause 6 is not such that "U or V"for "W" and "T" for "U or V" or "T" for "U or V" and the overall "T forU or V" for "W" but such that "T" for "U" or "V" for "W".

In many cases, the correct parsing tree standing for the partial clause6 should be analyzed not as shown in FIG. 21 or 22 but as shown in FIG.23. However, in actual, this analysis does not always hold true to sucha partial clause as "T for U or V in W (partial clause 7)".

From the experiential rules about the interpretation of the partialclauses 4, 5, 6 and 7 as described above, a more general experientialrule can be extracted. That is, the partial clause having a word rangeof "Noun Phrase 1, Preposition 1, Phrase 2, Equivalent Conjunction, NounPhrase 3, Preposition 2, Phrase 4 (partial clause 8)" should beinterpreted as follows if the preposition 1 is the same word as thepreposition 2. The most possible translation is: the noun phrase 1, thepreposition 1 and the phrase 2 are collectively interpreted as one nounphrase A and the noun phrase 3, the preposition 2 and the phrase 4 arecollectively interpreted as one noun phrase B, the noun phrase A and thenoun phrase B are interpreted to be connected by the equivalentconjunction as one noun phrase.

According to how to write the syntax priority rule according to thisembodiment, this experiential rule is formulated. This formulation meansthe rule (y1) of Table 3.

The rule (y1) uses an asterisk symbol "*" in addition to the indexes andthe symbols described above. In the syntax priority rule according tothis embodiment, the asterisk symbol "*" means a symbol to be replacedwith what kind of terminal symbol or non-terminal symbol. In the partialclause 8 standing for the experiential rule, the phrases 2 and 4 do nothave specified index names. The asterisk symbol "*" is used when theexperiential rule containing such a word or phrase is formulated as asyntax priority rule.

The rule (y1) needs to meet the condition that the preposition 1 is thesame word as the preposition 2 as in the partial clause 8. Hence, in theleft hand of the rule, the incidental condition is provided indicating"the fifth element has the same surface layer as the eleventh element".

The syntax priority rule used in this embodiment recognizes a rule thatthe priority condition (left hand of the rule) is just the form of theparsing tree consisting of a range of terminal symbols and non-terminalsymbols and a rule (y1) that the incident priority condition is thesurface layer, that is, the information about the characters of thewords. The syntax priority rule according to the present inventioncovers specification of the characters of all the words as a phrase aswell as specification of the form of the parsing tree and theinformation like characters about a key word.

In the incidental condition of the rule (y1), the n-th element (n is anatural number) indicates an n-th end or non-terminal symbol or anasterisk symbol "*" sequentially counted From the left hand (a plussymbol and a parenthesis are ignored when counting the indexes) in thepart except the "incidental condition" in the left hand of the rule,that is, the form of the parsing tree. Hence, in the rule (y1), thefifth and the eleventh elements mean the "preposition".

Next, the description will be oriented to the meaning of the right handof the syntax priority rule indicated in Table 3 and a syntax priorityinterpreting method using the syntax priority rule.

In calculating the priority of the parsing tree, one non-terminal symbolin the parsing tree has one score. This is referred to as a "basicscore" of each non-terminal symbol. In this embodiment, the basic scoreis one. In actuality, however, if there is provided a translationmachine which gives a score to the non-terminal symbol or thegrammatical rule of Table 2 for improving the translating accuracy,these scores may be considered as a basic score.

In the parsing tree having no spot where the syntax priority rule mayapply as shown in Table 3, the priority of the overall parsing tree(referred to as a "general priority before correction" of the overallparsing tree) is a sum of the basic scores of all the non-terminalsymbols contained in the parsing tree.

That is, if the basic score for one non-terminal symbol is one, thegeneral priority before correction of the overall parsing tree isequivalent to the number of the non-terminal symbols included in theparsing tree. When comparing the priority of one parsing tree with thatof another tree, the comparison uses a value given by dividing thegeneral priority before correction included in the parsing tree by thenumber of non-terminal symbols.

The value is referred to as a "general priority after correction". Thefitness of the syntax does not essentially depend on the complicationand the scale of the form of the syntax. This treatment is executed foreliminating the influence of the factors such as the complication andthe scale from the general priority.

As a result, one score is always given to the general priority aftercorrection of the parsing tree having no spot where the syntax priorityrule may not apply.

Next, the description will be oriented to the parsing tree having a spotwhere one of the syntax priority rules listed in Table 3 may apply.

Assume that a syntactic analyzing rule may apply to a node A in theparsing tree. The non-terminal symbol of the node A coincides with thenon-terminal symbol located at the top of the partial parsing treeindicated in the left hand of the applicable syntactic analyzing rule."Non-terminal symbol located at the top of the partial parsing tree"indicates the highest non-terminal symbol as shown in FIG. 14 or 16 orthe non-terminal symbol in the leftmost side of the description of therule shown in Table 3.

In this case, the sum of the basic scores of all the non-terminalsymbols located at the node A or a lower spot than the node A ismultiplied by a value of "priority magnification" written in the righthand of the applicable syntactic analyzing rule. The multiplied value isconsidered as a sum of the basic scores of all the non-terminal symbolslocated at the node A or a lower spot than the node A. This value isreferred to as a "partial general priority with the node A as a vertex".The partial general priority has values "before correction" and "aftercorrection". The value "before correction" is a value given bymultiplying a sum of the basic scores by the value in the right hand ofthe syntax priority rule and the value "after correction" is a valuegiven by dividing the value "before correction" by the number of thenon-terminal symbols.

With this operation, finally, the general priority after correction ofthe overall sentence can be obtained. About the sentence from which twoor more parsing trees are derived, by comparing the general prioritiesafter correction among the parsing tree, it is possible to define themost fitting parsing tree.

As shown in FIG. 11a to 11k, the partial clause 3 of the originalsentence 2 is allowed to be interpreted into eleven ways. From theseinterpreted results, the interpretations 1 and 7 are taken as examples.The method for calculating the general priority of the overall parsingtree by using the priority interpretations 1 and 7 shown in FIGS. 11aand 11g will be described below.

The parsing tree of the interpretation 1 does not have any spot wherethe syntax priority rules of Table 3 may apply. The parsing tree of theinterpretation 7 has a spot where the syntax priority rule (y1) of Table3 may apply. The parsing trees except the interpretations 1 and 7 do nothave any spot where the syntax priority rules of Table 3 may apply. Thatis, as mentioned above, the general priority after correction of theparsing trees defined by the interpretations except the interpretations1 and 7 has the same value as that of the interpretation 1. Hence, thedescription about the calculating process except the interpretations 1and 7 is left out.

As shown in FIG. 10, the parsing tree of the original sentence 2 has twoparts, that is, a part to be interpreted in some ways and a part to beinterpreted in one way. In this embodiment, the comparison of thepriority if the tree is interpreted into some ways uses the generalpriority of the overall sentence, that is, the general priority aftercorrection calculated at the node where the non-terminal symbol"sentence" is written in FIG. 10. If possible, however, it is possibleto use for comparison the partial general priority after correctioncalculated at the vertex of the partial parsing tree of the part to beinterpreted into some ways (partial clause 3), that is, the node wherethe non-terminal symbol "verb phrase" is written in FIG. 10.

Next, the description will be oriented to the process for calculatingthe priority for the interpretation 1 shown in FIG. 11a as referring toFIGS. 24 and 25.

The technique for analyzing the syntax is divided into a top-down typefor building the parsing tree from the vertex to the end and a bottom-uptype for building it from the end to the vertex. Likewise, it isconsidered that the calculating method may be divided into the top-downtype and the bottom-up type. This embodiment will be described on thebasis of the bottom-up type calculating method.

The actual data of the parsing tree for the interpretation 1 in thetranslation machine of this embodiment is stored in the buffer C shownin FIG. 4 in the form shown in FIG. 11A, the detail of which is shown inFIG. 24. At first, the process at the node (1) of the non-terminalsymbol "noun phrase" shown in FIG. 24 will be described later.

The partial parsing tree with the node (1) as the vertex covers the word"films". In the range of the partial parsing tree, only the node (1) isprovided. Since the node (1) itself has one basic score, the sum of thebasic scores of all the non-terminal symbols located at a node (1) or alower place than the node (1) (upper place in FIG. 24) is one score.Since no syntax priority rule applicable to the node (1) is provided,the priority magnification is 1.0.

In the column standing for the node (1) in FIG. 24, four numericalvalues of 1.0, 1.0, 1 and 1.0 are described in addition to the name ofthe node and the non-terminal symbol name noun phrase In the form ofstoring the parsing tree data in this embodiment, at a place for storinga node with a non-terminal symbol, an area is provided for storing suchfour numerical values.

The numerical value "1.0" of the first area is a priority magnificationgiven by applying the syntax priority rule to the node. As mentionedabove, since no syntax priority rule applicable to the node (1) isprovided, the numerical value 1.0 which does not change the multiplicandif multiplied is stored in the first area. Next, since the sum of thebasic scores of all the non-terminal symbols at the node (1) or a lowerlocation than the node (1) (upper in FIG. 24) is one score, this sum ismultiplied by the priority magnification 1.0 for obtaining the numericalvalue 1.0. This is the partial general priority before correction withthe node (1) as a vertex as mentioned above. This numerical value isstored in the second area. The third area stores the number of all thenon-terminal symbols located at the node (1) or a lower location thanthe node (1) (upper in FIG. 24). Since the node (1) has just onenon-terminal symbol, a value of 1 is stored in the third area. Thefourth area stores a numerical value given by dividing the numericalvalue of the second area by the numerical value of the third area. Thisis the partial general priority after correction with the node (1) as avertex as mentioned above. This is a numerical value of 1.0.

The four numerical values are stored in the corresponding areas of thenode (1) as described above.

The method for calculating each of the four numerical values for thenodes (2), (3) and (4) shown in FIG. 24 will be easily understood fromthe above calculating method for the node (1) and hence is not describedherein.

Next, the description will be oriented to the process for thenon-terminal symbol "noun phrase" at the node (5) shown in FIG. 24.

The partial parsing tree with the node (5) as a vertex covers the wordtrain "the camera". In the range of the partial parsing tree, thenon-terminal symbols exist at the nodes (2) and (5). The sum of thebasic scores contained at the node (2) or a lower location than the node(2) in the partial parsing tree is stored in the second region of thestorage area for the node (2). This is the partial general priority 1.0before correction with the node (2) as a vertex. The node (5) has itsown one basic score. Hence, the sum of the basic scores of all thenon-terminal symbols at the node (5) or a lower location than the node(5) is 2.0. Since no syntax priority rule applicable to the node (5) isprovided, the priority magnification is 1.0, which is stored in thefirst region of the storage area for the node (5). The value of 2.0 ismultiplied by the priority magnification 1.0 for obtaining the partialgeneral priority 2.0 with the node (5) as a vertex. The value of 2.0 isstored in the second region of the storage area for the node (5). Insuccession, the number of all the non-terminal symbols located at thenode (5) or a lower place than the node (5) (upper in FIG. 24) iscounted. At a time, the number of the non-terminal symbols at the node(2) or a lower place than the node (2) (upper in FIG. 24) is stored inthe third region of the storage area for the node (2). Hence, the numberof the non-terminal symbols at a lower place than the node (2) (upper inFIG. 24) is not required to be counted. The numerical value 1 stored inthe third region of the storage area for the node (2) is used. As aresult, the number of the non-terminal symbols at the node (5) or alower place than the node (5) (upper in FIG. 24) is derived as 2. Thevalue of 2 is stored in the third region of the storage area for thenode (5). Further, the value of the second region for the node (5) isdivided by the numerical value in the third area for obtaining thepartial general priority after correction with the node (5) as a vertex.This value of 1.0 is stored in the fourth region of the storage area forthe node (5).

Likewise, for each of the nodes (6), (7), (8), (9), (10) and (11), thereare derived four numerical values including the priority magnificationgiven by applying the syntax priority rule to the node, the partialgeneral priority before correction with the node as a vertex, the numberof all the non-terminal symbols located at the node or a lower placethan the node (upper in FIG. 24), and the partial general priority aftercorrection with the node as a vertex. The four numerical values arestored in the corresponding storage area for each of the nodes in thebuffer C.

The sequence of deriving the four values is not limited to the sequenceof the node (6), the node (7), the node (8), the node (9), the node (10)and the node (11). With the aforementioned operation, in the fourthregion of the storage area for the node (11), there is stored thepartial general priority after correction with the node (11) as avertex, that is, the priority 1.0 for the partial clause 3.

Further, as shown in FIG. 25, the four numerical values are derived forthe nodes (12), (13), and (14).

As a result, in the fourth region of the storage area for the node (14),the syntax priority 1.0 of the overall original sentence 2 (given if thepartial clause 3 is interpreted like the interpretation 1 of FIG. 11a)is obtained.

Next, the description will be oriented to the process for calculating apriority given in the case of the interpretation 7 indicated in FIG. 11gas referring to FIGS. 26 and 27.

FIG. 27 shows in detail the actual data of the parsing tree in the caseof the interpretation 7 in the translation machine according to thisembodiment.

The method for calculating the four numerical values for each of thenodes (1), (2), (3), (4), (5), (6), (7), (8), (9) and (10) is the sameas the method referred in FIGS. 24 and 25. It will be easily understoodfrom the method for interpreting the priority in the case of theinterpretation 1 of FIG. 11a and hence is not described herein.

Next, the description will be oriented to the process in the node (11)having the non-terminal symbol "noun phrase" shown in FIG. 26.

The partial parsing tree with the node (11) as a vertex covers the wordtrain "films for the camera and tapes for the VTR". In the range of thepartial parsing tree, the non-terminal symbols are provided in the node(11) itself, the node (1), the node (2), the node (3), the node (4), thenode (5), the node (6), the node (7), the node (8), the node (9), andthe node (10). Of these non-terminal symbols, the nodes (1), (2), (5)and (7) exist inside of the partial parsing tree with the node (9) as avertex. Further, the nodes (3), (4), (6) and (8) exist inside of thepartial parsing tree with the node (10) as a vertex.

The sum of the basic scores contained in the partial parsing treelocated at the node (9) or a lower place than the node (9) is consideredas the partial general priority 5.0 before correction with the node (9)as a vertex stored in the second region. Likewise, the sum of the basicscores contained in the partial parsing tree located at the node (10) ora lower place than the node (10) is considered as the partial generalpriority 5.0 before correction with the node (10) as a vertex stored inthe second region of the storage area for the node (10).

Since the node (11) has its own one basic score, the sum of the basicscores of all the non-terminal symbols at the node (11) or a lower placethan the node (11) (upper in FIG. 26) is 11.0. Further, since the syntaxpriority rule (y1) of Table 3 is applicable to the node (11), thepriority magnification is 2.0 described in the right hand of the rule(y1). The value of 2.0 is stored in the first region of the storage areafor the node (11).

Next, the total 11.0 of the basic scores of all the non-terminal symbolsat the node (11) or a lower place than the node (11) (upper in FIG. 28)is multiplied by the priority magnification 2.0 for obtaining thepartial general priority before correction with the node (11) as avertex, 22.0. The value of 22.0 is stored in the second region of thestorage area for the node (11).

In succession, the number of all the non-terminal symbols located at thenode (11) or a lower place than the node (11) (upper in FIG. 26) iscounted. At a time, the number of the non-terminal symbols located atthe node (9) and a lower place than the node (9) (upper in FIG. 26) isstored in the third region of the storage area for the node (9). Hence,the number of the non-terminal symbols located at the node (9) or alower place than the node (9) (upper in FIG. 26) is not required to becounted. The value of 5 is used as the number.

Likewise, it is not necessary to count the number of the non-terminalsymbols located at the node (10) or a lower place than the node (10)(upper in FIG. 26). As the number, the value of 5 stored in the thirdregion of the storage area for the node (10) is used. Hence, the numberof the non-terminal symbols located at the node (11) or a lower placethan the node (11) (upper in FIG. 26) is derived as 11. The value of 11is stored in the third region of the storage area for the node (11).

Then, the numerical value stored in the second region for the node (11)is divided by the value stored in the third region for obtaining thepartial general priority after correction with the node (11) as avertex. The value of 2.0 is stored in the fourth region for the node(11).

In the interpretation 1 of FIG. 11a described as referring to FIGS. 24and 25, no node to which the syntax priority rules of Table 3 may applyis provided. Hence, no place exists where the general priority aftercorrection has any value except 1.0. In this respect, the interpretation7 shown in FIG. 11g described as referring to FIGS. 26 and 27 has adistinguishably different result.

For the node (12) shown in FIG. 26, the similar operation is executed toderive the four numerical values including the priority magnificationgiven by applying the syntax priority rule to the node, the partialpriority before correction with the node as a vertex, the number of allthe non-terminal symbols located at the node or a lower place than thenode (upper in FIG. 28), and the partial general priority aftercorrection with the node as a vertex. Those four numerical values arestored in the corresponding storage regions for the node in the bufferC, respectively.

As a result of executing the above operation, in the fourth region ofthe storage area for the node (12), the partial general priority aftercorrection with the node (12) as a vertex, that is, the priority of thepart corresponding to the partial clause 3 is derived as a value of1.917. This value is distinguishably different from the value given inthe interpretation 1 shown in FIG. 11a. Further, as shown in FIG. 27, insuccession, for the nodes (13), (14), and (15), the similar operation isexecuted to derive the four numerical values. With these resultingvalues, the syntax priority of the overall original sentence 2 (when thepartial clause 3 is interpreted as shown in FIG. 11g) is derived as1.783, which is stored in the fourth region of the storage area for thenode (15).

As described above, for the two interpretations, that is, theinterpretation 1 of FIG. 11a and the interpretation 7 of FIG. 11g ofsome interpretations obtained from the original sentence 2, the syntaxpriorities (general priorities after correction of the overall sentence)are derived. The interpretation 1 has a value of 1.0, while theinterpretation 7 has a value of 1.733. Hence, by comparing theinterpretations with 7 in light of the value, the translation machineaccording to this embodiment operates to put the interpretation 7 on thepriority rather than the interpretation 1.

In addition, as mentioned above, the syntax priority (general priorityafter correction of the overall original sentence 2) about anyinterpretation except the interpretations 1 and 7 is 1.0.

Next, the description will be oriented to the operation of thetranslation machine using the priority interpretation shown in FIG. 1 asreferring to the flowchart of FIG. 28.

As described above, this embodiment is arranged to implement the processfrom "morphological analysis" to "syntactic analysis" to "conversion" to"generating of a translated sentence" as shown in FIG. 3, for thepurpose of obtaining a translated sentence from an original sentence.The present invention, however, is not limited to the translationmachine having such an arrangement but may apply to all the translationmachines only if it has the process of "syntax process. For example, theinvention may apply to such a translation machine as having a process of"semantic analysis" after the "syntactic analysis".

At first, the inputted sentence "I bought films for the camera and tapesfor the VTR." is stored in the buffer A (step S1). The morphologicalanalysis is executed about the content of the buffer A. The processedresult is stored in the buffer B (step S2). Then, the buffer C storingthe syntax-analyzed result is cleared (step S3).

In succession, the syntactic analysis involving the priorityinterpretation is executed. From the content of the buffer B, all thepossible parsing trees are built (step S4) and are stored in the bufferC (step S4). When new creation of a parsing tree from the content of thebuffer B is made impossible, the operation goes from the step S4 to thestep S5.

Next, two or more parsing trees stored in the buffer C rank in order,based on their general priorities after correction (step S5). Herein, ofthe eleven parsing trees as shown in FIGS. 11a to 11k, theinterpretation 7 shown in FIG. 11g ranks first. Then, the parsing treeabout the interpretation 7 shown in FIG. 11g is sent from the buffer Cto the converting unit 19 (see FIG. 3) (step S6).

Next, it is determined whether or not the parsing tree of theinterpretation 7 is converted in the converting unit 19 (step S7). Ifnot, the operation goes to a step S13. At this step, it is determinedwhether or not the parsing trees are left in the buffer C without beingsent to the converting unit 10. If it is, the operation returns to thestep S6. If it is not, it means that the translation has failed.

If, at the step S7, it is determined that the converted result isobtained, the parsing tree (converted) of the interpretation 7 is sentto the translated sentence generating unit 20 (see FIG. 3) (step S8).Then, it is determined whether or not the parsing tree (converted) ofthe interpretation 7 gives the corresponding translated sentence in thetranslated sentence generating unit 20 (step S9).

If not at the step S9, the operation goes to a step S13 at which it isdetermined whether or not the parsing trees are left in the buffer Cwithout being sent to the converting unit 19. If it is, the operationreturns to the step S6. If it is not, it means that the translation hasfailed.

If, at the step S9, it is determined that the parsing tree (converted)of the interpretation 7 gives the corresponding translated sentence inthe translated sentence generating unit 20, the translated result of theinterpretation 7 appears on the display device (step S10).

The translated sentence of the original sentence 2 (based on the parsingtree of the interpretation 7) "I bought (films for the camera) and(tapes for the VTR). (translated sentence 4)"appearing on the displaydevice is determined by a user to be approximate or not. The determinedresult is inputted from the keyboard (step S11). Based on the result,the translated sentence is determined (step S12). If it is approximate,the translation of the original sentence 2 is terminated.

If the user inputs that the translated sentence 9 is not approximate atthe step S11, the operation goes from step S12 to the step S13. However,the translated sentence 9 of the original sentence 2 is considered to beapproximate if the translation machine keeps the current translatinglevel. In many cases, hence, it is considered that the user may input anindication that the translated sentence 9 is approximate.

The present invention, therefore, makes it possible to enhance thepossibility that the first translated sentence about an originalsentence given to the user is the most fitting.

In this embodiment, the translation machine uses such a user interfaceas outputting the possible translated sentences of one original sentenceone by one according to the user's operation if two or more possibletranslated sentences may be generated from the original sentence. Thepresent invention may apply to another type of translation machine. Forexample, the invention may apply to a translation machine using such auser interface as outputting all the possible translated sentences at atime. In this case, the application of the invention makes it possibleto output all the possible translated sentences in sequence along highersyntax ranks. Those sentences on the screen are ranged along theirranks. If two or more translated sentences may be derived from oneoriginal sentence, the translation machine according to the invention isarranged to output only one translated sentence with the highest syntaxrank.

The present invention may apply to such a translation machine as using aparallel parsing technique in the syntactic analyzing unit. The parallelparsing technique is a technique of building all the possible syntaxesfrom one inputted source language with one syntactic analyzingoperation. After two or more syntactic analyzing solutions are obtainedat a time, those solutions are fed to the process after the syntacticanalysis one by one. The solutions are fed along the higher syntaxranks.

This operation is implemented in the translation machine according toanother embodiment of the invention.

The translation machine according to the present invention is arrangedto store information indicating an index about a fitting form of asyntax and build the syntax and derive a fitting value of the syntax byreferring to the information. If two or more syntaxes are derived fromone sentence, by comparing the fitting values derived about the syntaxeswith each other, the priority of each syntax and the priority rank amongthe competing syntaxes are defined.

In a case that two or more syntaxes are built from one original sentenceone by one or at a time, any one of the syntaxes may be determined to beapproximate or not independently of the content of the sentence. Thatis, if the competition takes place among the possible syntaxes, somesyntaxes having certain forms may be experientially determined only fromthe purely grammatical information without using the other information(like meaning information).

The translation machine according to the present invention, therefore,operates to obtain the two or more possible syntax solutions as a resultof analyzing the syntax of the original sentence one by one or at onetime and ranking these syntax solutions according to the fitness derivedfrom the form of each syntax. If the translation machine uses such auser interface type, the machine may easily output the best of the twoor more translated sentences to be theoretically generated by thetranslation machine. If the translation machine uses such a userinterface type as outputting two or more translated sentences for oneoriginal sentence, the machine may easily output a better translatedsentence at an earlier stage.

In turn, the description will be oriented to a translation machineaccording to a second embodiment of the present invention.

The translation machine according to the second embodiment has thesubstantially same arrangement as the foregoing translation machineaccording to the first embodiment. Hence, about the arrangement, see thedescription about the arrangement of the foregoing translation machine.Later, the translating process executed in the translation machineaccording to the second embodiment will be described. In thedescription, the components of the translation machine have the samenumbers as those of the first embodiment, which are used therefor. Thespecific terms such as an terminal symbol, a non-terminal symbol, and asyntax priority used in the second embodiment have the same definitionsas those used in the first embodiment. Further, the grammatical rulesused in the second embodiment are the same as those used in the firstembodiment. Concretely, see the Table 2 described above.

Now, consider that the inputted original sentence is "I bought films forthe camera and tapes for the VTR" (the original sentence 2).

The morphological analysis is executed for this original sentence andthen the syntactic analysis is also executed according to thegrammatical rules listed in the Table 2. The resulting parsing treebecomes that as shown in FIG. 29. In the original sentence 2, the clauseof "bought films for the camera and tapes for the VTR" is not allowed tobe defined in one way only based on the grammatical rules in the Table2. The triangle shown in FIG. 29 indicates the clause to be analyzedinto two or more ways. The actual parsing trees from that clause areshown in FIGS. 30 to 37. In addition, the parsing trees obtained fromthat clause and the grammatical rules listed in the Table 2 may havemore forms rather than those shown in FIGS. 30 to 37. By consideringthat the nodes (A) to (H) of each of the partial analyzing trees shownin FIGS. 30 to 37 are connected to the nodes (A) to (H) of the parsingtree shown in FIG. 29, it is possible to obtain a complete parsing treecorresponding to the overall original sentence 2. The buffer C119 (seeFIG. 39) enables to store all of these parsing trees at one time.

The translation machine according to this embodiment provides a syntaxpriority learning function of ranking the forms of the parsing treesbased on the translated result selected by the user. When executing thesyntactic analysis with the syntax priority interpretation, the syntaxpriority rules listed in the following Table 4 are used in addition tothe grammatical rules listed in the Table 2.

                  TABLE 4    ______________________________________    (yl) Verb Phrase (Verb + Noun Phrase (Noun Phrase +    Preposition Phrase (Preposition + Noun Phrase (Noun Phrase +    Equivalent Conjunction + Noun Phrase))) + Preposition    Phrase): Verb Phrase (Verb + Noun Phrase (Noun Phrase    (Noun Phrase + Preposition Phrase (Preposition + Noun    Phrase)) + Equivalent Conjunction + Noun Phrase (Noun    Phrase + Preposition Phrase)))    -> 2    (y2)    -> 1    (y3)    -> 3    ______________________________________

The syntax priority rule is a rule in which if the group of indexesunder one non-terminal symbol (this is a non-terminal symbol A) includedin the parsing tree meet an incidental condition, a certain priorityvalue is given to the non-terminal symbol (non-terminal symbol A)located at the vertex of the index group.

The translation machine according to this embodiment operates to buildtwo or more parsing trees when translating an original sentence andoutput the corresponding translated sentences to those trees. A userselects one of the translated sentences. The priority parsing tree isthe tree on which the selected translated sentence is generated. At thistime, the syntax priority rules are generated by the translation machineand are stored in the priority storage means provided in the translationmachine. The actual syntax priority rule generated at this time is thestructure of a different part between the priority parsing tree and theother parsing trees. The overall priority parsing tree is not includedas a rule. That is, for the original sentence 2, any one of the partialparsing trees shown in FIGS. 30 to 37 is made to be a syntax priorityrule.

Each syntax priority rule has a type indicated by (y1). In the rule (y1)of the Table 4, the part before the arrow, that is,

    ______________________________________    Verb Phrase (Verb + Noun Phrase (Noun Phrase +    Preposition Phrase (Preposition + Noun Phrase (Noun Phrase +    Equivalent Conjunction + Noun Phrase))) + Preposition    Phrase): Verb Phrase (Verb + Noun Phrase (Noun Phrase (Noun    Phrase + Preposition Phrase (Preposition + Noun Phrase)) +    Equivalent Conjunction + Noun Phrase (Noun Phrase +    Preposition Phrase)))    ______________________________________

is the left hand of the rule. The part after the arrow, that is, 2 isthe right hand of the rule.

Now, the meaning of the left hand of the syntax priority rule will bedescribed. The left hand of the rule (y1) of the Table 4 is composed oftwo parts delimited by a symbol ":". Each part delimited by the symbol":" represents a non-terminal symbol included in the parsing tree and aform of a partial analyzing tree made of some non-terminal or terminalsymbols under the non-terminal symbol. The symbols such as parentheses"("and")" and a plus symbol "+" used in the rules function in thesimilar manner to those used in the first embodiment. Hence, for thesesymbols, refer to the description about the Table 3 and FIGS. 12 to 14.

By referring to the meanings of the symbols, it will be understood thatthe first part delimited by ":" in the left hand of the rule (y1) of theTable 4,

    ______________________________________    Verb Phrase (Verb + Noun Phrase (Noun Phrase +    Preposition Phrase (Preposition + Noun Phrase (Noun Phrase +    Equivalent Conjunction + Noun Phrase))) + Preposition    Phrase), takes the form of the parsing tree as shown in FIG. 30.    Further, the second part of the left hand of the rule (y1),    Verb Phrase (Verb + Noun Phrase (Noun Phrase (Noun    Phrase + Preposition Phrase (Preposition + Noun Phrase)) +    Equivalent Conjunction + Noun Phrase (Noun Phrase +    Preposition Phrase))),    ______________________________________

may take the form of the parsing tree as shown in FIG. 34.

The left hand of the rule (y1) of the Table 4 is composed of two partsdelimited by the symbol ":". The number of the parts composing the lefthand is not limited to two. In the left hand of the syntax priorityrule, the partial parsing trees competing with each other may be locatedat the same part of the overall parsing tree of the sentence. And, theright hand of the syntax priority rule stands for which is the parsingtree with the highest rank of the partial parsing trees ranged in theleft hand. Hence, the number of the parsing trees located in the hefthand of one rune is not limited. It may be one or more.

Then, the description will be oriented to the operation of thetranslation machine using the syntax priority learning function asreferring to FIGS. 38a and 38b. In this embodiment, one translatedsentence is allowed to be outputted for one original sentence. By theuser's operation, another translated sentence may be outputted one byone.

The operation flows in the arrangement of the translating module shownin FIG. 39.

At a step S1, the original sentence of "I bought films for the cameraand tapes for the VTR." is stored in the buffer A117 (see FIG. 39).Next, at a step S2, the content of the buffer A117 is subject to themorphological analysis and the analyzed result is stored in the bufferB118. At a step S3, the buffer C119 for storing the syntax-analyzedresult is cleared. At a next step S4, the buffer T122 of FIG. 39 iscleared. The buffer T is a temporary buffer required for implementingthis embodiment.

Proceeding to a step S5, a point Pc is cleared. The pointer means is avariable to be set for pointing to a certain specific location on thememory or the buffer. Then, at the step S6, the variable F1 for the flagis set to zero (0).

At a step S7, the syntactic analysis is executed. The syntactic analysismakes it possible to build all the parsing trees from the content of thebuffer B118 and is stored in the buffer C119. When these parsing treesare derived from the original sentence 2, the parsing trees composed bycombining the tree shown in FIG. 29 with each of the trees shown inFIGS. 30 to 37 are stored in the buffer C119. If the new parsing tree isno longer generated from the content of the buffer B118, the operationgoes from the step S7 to the step S8.

At the step S8, about each of the parsing trees stored in the bufferC119, if the flag variable Fc () accompanied with the parsing tree iszero (0), the memory 106 is retrieved for determining if the matchingsyntax priority rule exists in the memory 106 of FIG. 39.

In the description of this embodiment, the term "matching" between aparsing tree T1 and another syntax priority rule R1 means that the"priority" parsing tree indicated in the left hand of R1 (referred to asTR1) is the same as T1, T1 is larger than TR1 and the part of the TR1has the same structure as the overall T1. However, it does not mean thatthe TR1 is larger than T1 and the part of T1 has the same structure asthe overall TR1.

Further, the flag variable Fc () means an area for storing the data ofthe parsing tree itself and an area for holding state information aboutwhether or not each of the parsing trees has been selected. That is,each area is referred to as the flag variable Fc () accompanied with theparsing tree. Fc () may take three values of 0, 1, 2 depending on thestate. Hereafter, the flag variable Fc () accompanied with one of theparsing trees, T1, stored in the buffer C119, is referred to as Fc (T1).

At the step S3, when the buffer C119 is cleared, all the flags Fc () aremade zero. Hence, when the operation reaches the step s8 for the firsttime until the original sentence is inputted, the flags Fc () about allthe parsing trees existing in the buffer C119 are made zero.

Hence, at the step s8, matching of all the parsing trees existing in thebuffer C119 to the syntax priority rules is executed.

Now, assume that the syntax priority rules matching to the parsing treesstored in the buffer C119 do not exist in the memory 106. Then, theoperation goes from the step s8 to s10. At the step s10, one of theparsing trees stored in the buffer C is selected if it has a flag Fc ()of zero and is pointed by the pointer Pc. Since the flags Fc () aboutall the parsing trees existing in the buffer C119 are made zero, all theparsing trees are to be selected. The method for selecting one of thetrees is any other method except the syntax priority interpretation.Concretely, any one of the methods referred in the known technique or acombination of two or more methods may be considered. At this time,assume that the parsing tree formed as shown in FIG. 40 is selected.This is referred to as a parsing tree Ta.

At a step S10, the pointer Pc points to the parsing tree Ta. At a nextstep S11, the flag Fc (Ta) accompanied with the parsing tree Ta is setas 1. If the flag Fc () is 1 or more, it means that the parsing treecorresponding to this flag Fc () is sent to the converting unit or laterin the processing flow.

Then, at a step s12, the parsing tree Ta is sent to the converting unit19 (see FIG. 3). The term "send" used in the description of thisembodiment is used for the information. Hence, the information does notdisappear after it is sent from the buffer or the like. For example, inthis case, the parsing tree Ta existing in the buffer C119 is sent tothe converting unit. In actual, after being sent, the parsing tree Ta iskept stored in the buffer C119 until the buffer is cleared.

The parsing tree Ta is converted in the converting unit 19 (see FIG. 3).The term "convert" used in the description of this embodiment is usedfor the information. In actual, hence, after being converted, theinformation before conversion is left as a principle.

Proceeding to a step S13, it is determined if the parsing tree Ta isconverted into the proper tree in the converting unit 19, if no properconverting result is obtained, the operation goes from the steps sis tos24. At the step s24, it is determined whether or not the parsing treesstored in the buffer C119 have the accompanied flags Fc () set as 0. Ifany, the operation returns to the step s8. If no, it means that thetranslation has failed. In this case, at the step s12, the convertedresult of the parsing tree Ta is obtained in the converting unit. Hence,the operation goes from the step s13 to a step 14, at which the parsingtree Ta (after converted) is sent to the translated sentence generatingunit 20 in FIG. 3.

At a step S15, it is determined if the generated result of the parsingtree Ta is obtained in the translated sentence generating unit 20. If noproper generated result is obtained, the operation goes from the stepss15 to s24. At the step s24, it is determined whether or not the parsingtrees stored in the buffer C119 have the accompanied flags Fc () set as0. If any, the operation returns to the step s8. If no, it means thatthe translation has failed. In this case, at the step s15, the generatedresult of the parsing tree Ta is obtained in the translated sentencegenerating unit 20. Hence, the operation goes from the step s15 to astep s16, at which the flag Fc (Ta) is set to 2. If the flag Fc () isset to 2, it means that the translation machine determines the parsingtree corresponding to this flag Fc () may be the basis of thegrammatically generated sentence.

Then, at a step s17, the translated result of the parsing tree Ta isdisplayed on the display device 13 (see FIG. 1).

The user determines whether or not the translated sentence of theoriginal sentence 2 based on the parsing tree Ta displayed on thedisplay device 13 is proper. The translated sentence is interpreted asfollows;

    "I bought films (for the camera and tapes), for the VTR. (translated sentence 4)"

The determined result is inputted from the keyboard at the step s18 (seeFIG. 38B). In this case, it is considered that the user determines thistranslated sentence is not proper.

At the step s18, the determined result is inputted from the keyboard 14(see FIG. 1). Then, the operation goes from a step s19 to a step s20, atwhich a value of 1 is set to the flag F1. The flag F1 set as 1 meansthat though the translated counterpart of the original sentence beingprocessed is outputted once, it is determined to be improper by the userand another candidate of the translated counterpart is required to beoutputted.

The operation goes from the step s20 to a step s24. In this case, sincethe parsing tree with the flag Fc () being set as 0 is left in thebuffer C119, the operation returns to the step s8.

At the step s8, no syntax priority rule matching to the trees stored inthe buffer C119 is provided. Hence, the parsing tree with the flag Fc ()being set as 0, concretely, one of the parsing trees stored in thebuffer C119 except the tree Ta, is selected by any method except thesyntax priority interpretation. Now, assume that the selected tree takesthe form as shown in FIG. 35. This tree will be referred to as a parsingtree Te.

As a result of the above operation, at the step s10, the pointer Pcpoints to the parsing tree Te.

Now, assume that the parsing tree Te is allowed to be converted into thetarget tree and to be generated into the translated counterpart on thetarget tree without any problem. Like the case of Ta described above,the operation goes from the steps s10 to s11 to s12 to s13 to s14 to s15to s16 to s17. Then, the translated sentence on the parsing tree Te isdisplayed on the display device 13 shown in FIG. 1. This translatedsentence is interpreted as follows;

    "I bought (films for the camera) and (tapes for the VTR)."

The user determines that this interpretation is proper.

At the step s18, the determined result is inputted from the keyboard 14.Then, the operation goes from the step s19 to a step s21, at which thevalue of the flag F1 is determined. As described above, if the flag F1has a value of 1, it means that the translated counterpart outputtedfrom the translation machine is required to be retried by the user.Hence, to allow a proper translated counterpart to be outputted oncewhen translating the sentence having the similar syntactic structure,the syntax priority learning is implemented for this case.

Next, the operation goes to the step s21 to s22, at which the parsingtrees with the flag Fc () being set as 2 are compared with each other ifthey are stored in the buffer C119. In this case, the correspondingtrees are Ta and Te. Hence, Ta and Te are compared. The different partis sent to the temporarily buffer T122 shown in FIG. 35. The common partto Ta and Te means the portion explicitly shown in FIG. 29. Thedifferent part for Ta is the partial parsing tree shown in FIG. 30 andthe different part for Te is the partial parsing tree shown in FIG. 34.

At the next step s28, the syntax priority rule is generated. In thiscase, the partial parsing trees shown in FIGS. 30 and 34 are competingin the buffer T122 (see FIG. 39) and the parsing tree pointed by thepointer Pc in the buffer C119 is Te on which the tree shown in FIG. 34is generated. The priority one of the parsing trees shown in the bufferT122 is as shown in FIG. 34. The resulting rule is (y21) listed in Table4.

This rule is stored in the memory 106 shown in FIG. 39. Then, thetranslation of the original sentence "I bought films For the camera andtapes for the VTR" is terminated.

Next, the description will be oriented to the translation operationbased on the syntax priority learned as mentioned above with referenceto FIGS. 33, 38A and 38B and 39. At this time, it is assumed that thememory 106 (see FIG. 39) stores the syntax priority rule ((y1) in Table4).

At the step s1, the inputted sentence of "She wears a necklace of goldand earrings of silver." is stored in the buffer A117. Then, at the steps2, the content of the buffer A117 is subject to the morphologicalanalysis and the result is stored in the buffer B118. Next, at the steps8, the buffer C119 storing the syntax-analyzed result is cleared. Atthe next step s4, the buffer T122 is cleared. At the next step s5, thepointer Pc is cleared. Then, at the step s6, the variable F1 for theflag is set as 0.

At the step s7, the syntactic analysis is executed. As a result, all thepossible parsing trees are built from the content of the buffer B118 andis stored in the buffer C119. In this case, the parsing trees as shownin FIG. 42 and 43 are derived from the inputted sentence. The tree shownin FIG. 42 is referred to as Tx and the tree shown in FIG. 43 isreferred to as Ty.

Next, when the operation reaches the step s8, since all the parsingtrees stored in the buffer C119 have their flags Pc () with a value of 0being set thereto, the operation is executed to execute the matching ofall the possible parsing trees stored in the buffer C119 to the syntaxpriority rules. In this case, since the syntax priority rule ((y1) inTable 4) is stored in the memory 106, this rule matches to the parsingtree Ty. That is, it will be clearly understood from the comparisonbetween FIGS. 43 and 34 that the parsing tree Ty includes the partialparsing tree formed as shown in FIG. 34 and this partial parsing treeshould rank first according to the syntax priority rule indicated by(y1) in Table 4.

Since the matching is achieved, the operation goes from the step s8 tos9, at which the pointer Pc points to the parsing tree Ty. When,therefore, the parsing trees Tx and Ty are competing, the parsing treeTy ranks first according to the syntax priority rule.

Proceeding to the step s11, the flag Fc (Ty) accompanied with theparsing tree Ty is set as 1.

Now, assume that the parsing tree Ty is allowed to be converted into aproper target tree and to be generated into the translated counterparton the target tree without any problem. Like the case of Te, theoperation goes from the step s11 to s12 to s13 to s14 to s15 to s16 tos17. As a result, the translated counterpart based on the parsing treeTy is displayed on the display device 13 (see FIG. 1). The translatedcounterpart is interpreted as;

    "She wears (a necklace of gold) and (earrings of silver)."

It is assumed that the user determines this interpretation is proper.

At the step s18, the determined result is inputted from the keyboard 14(see FIG. 1). Hence, the operation goes from the step s18 to s21, atwhich the value of the flag F1 is determined. Since the F1 being set as0 at the step s6 is kept changed, the translation is terminated. Thisinterpretation is defined for the original sentence.

As described above, the syntax priority information is learned on thetranslated sentence selected by the user when two or more syntaxes arecompeting about the previous original sentence of "I bought films forthe camera and tapes for the VTR". Based on the learned information, thenext original sentence of "She wears a necklace of gold and earrings ofsilver" is properly translated into the target language and then isoutputted for the first time, because both of the original sentenceshave the similar forms. If the syntax priority is not learned, whentranslating the next original sentence, the parsing tree Tx shown inFIG. 42 may be selected earlier than the parsing tree Ty shown in FIG.43. By this selection, the translated sentence outputted for the firsttime is based on the interpretation of:

"I wears a necklace of (gold and earrings) of silver."

This will be determined to be improper by the user.

In the actual translating operation, "Learning a syntax priority" and"translation based on the learned rule" may take place at a time. Theoperation to be done at this time will be easily presumed from the abovedescription. Hence, the operation is not described herein.

Like the first embodiment, this embodiment concerns with the translationmachine which needs to execute the process from "morphological analysis"to "syntactic analysis" to "conversion" to "translated sentencegeneration" as shown in FIG. 3. The translation machine to which thepresent invention may apply is not limited to that needing to do theprocess. The present invention may apply to any translation machinecontaining the process of "syntactic analysis", which includes thetranslation machine arranged to do "semantic analysis" after the"syntactic analysis", for example.

The second embodiment may take the following transformations, any ofwhich is essentially included in the scope of the present invention.

The foregoing description about the translation machine according to thesecond embodiment is expanded on such an arrangement as outputting twoor more translated sentences from one original sentence one by one. Inactuality, however, the present invention may apply to another kind oftranslation machine. For example, the invention may apply to thetranslation machine arranged to output all the translated sentences atone time, which are ranged on the display along their higher ranks.

According to the present invention, the syntax priority rules generatedin learning have the following types.

(1) Only the priority partial parsing tree is indicated. For example,only the tree shown in FIG. 34 is indicated. This rule is shown in (y11)of Table 5.

                  TABLE 5    ______________________________________    (y11) Verb Phrase (Verb + Noun Phrase (Noun Phrase (Noun    Phrase + Preposition Phrase (Preposition + Noun Phrase)) +    Equivalent Conjunction + Noun Phrase (Noun Phrase +    Preposition Phrase)))    (y12)    Verb Phrase (Verb + Noun Phrase (Noun Phrase + Preposition    Phrase (Preposition + Noun Phrase (Noun Phrase + Equivalent    Conjunction + Noun Phrase))) + Preposition Phrase):    Verb Phrase (Verb + Noun Phrase (Noun Phrase (Noun    Phrase + Preposition Phrase (Preposition + Noun Phrase)) +    Equivalent Conjunction + Noun Phrase) + Preposition Phrase):    Verb Phrase (Verb Phrase (Verb + Noun Phrase) + Preposition    Phrase (Preposition + Noun Phrase (Noun Phrase (Noun    Phrase + Equivalent Conjunction + Noun Phrase) +    Preposition Phrase))): Verb Phrase (Verb + Noun Phrase (Noun    Phrase + Preposition Phrase (Preposition + Noun Phrase (Noun    Phrase (Noun Phrase + Equivalent Conjunction + Noun    Phrase) + Preposition Phrase)))): Verb Phrase (Verb + Noun    Phrase (Noun Phrase (Noun Phrase + Preposition Phrase    (Preposition + Noun Phrase)) + Equivalent    Conjunction + Noun Phrase (Noun Phrase + Preposition    Phrase))): Verb Phrase (Verb Phrase (Verb + Noun    Phrase) + Preposition Phrase (Preposition + Noun Phrase (Noun    Phrase + Equivalent Conjunction + Noun Phrase (Noun    Phrase + Preposition Phrase)))): Verb Phrase (Verb + Noun    Phrase (Noun Phrase + Preposition Phrase (Preposition + Noun    Phrase (Noun Phrase + Equivalent Conjunction + Noun Phrase    (Noun Phrase + Preposition Phrase)))))): Verb Phrase    (Verb + Noun Phrase (Noun Phrase (Noun Phrase + Preposition    Phrase (Preposition + Noun Phrase (Noun Phrase + Equivalent    Conjunction + Noun Phrase))) + Preposition Phrase))    -->5    ______________________________________

(2) The priority partial parsing tree and the partial parsing tree(s)explicitly rejected by the user are indicated. The priority tree isselectively indicated. For example, the trees shown in FIGS. 30 and 34are indicated and the tree shown in FIG. 34 is selectively indicated.Such a rule is listed in (y1) of Table 4.

(3) All the different partial syntax trees competing in the buffer C119are indicated. The priority tree is selectively indicated. For example,all the trees shown in FIGS. 30 to 37 are indicated and the tree shownin FIG. 34 is selectively indicated. Such a rule is listed in (y12) ofTable 5.

Further, the syntax priority rules may be interpreted as follows.

(1) When the competition of the syntaxes takes place, if the parsingtree matches to the partial parsing tree recognized as "ranking first"in the rule, all the trees except it competing in the buffer C119 areequally treated as "not ranking first".

If the generated syntax priority rule may take the types (2) and (3),the description about the parsing trees except the ranking-first tree ismeaningless. The types (2) and (3) taken as a rule are redundant.

(2) When the competition of the syntaxes takes place, the priorityparsing tree is the tree matching to the partial parsing tree determinedto rank first according to the rule. About the parsing trees competingin the buffer C119 except the priority tree, the parsing tree notdescribed in the rule is determined to rank second. The tree rankinglast is a parsing tree matching to the partial parsing trees except thepartial parsing tree "ranking first" according to the rule (which areexplicitly rejected by the user as described in the type (2) of thesyntax priority rule).

In addition, this method is meaningful if the generated syntax priorityrules are (2) and (3).

The method described in the embodiment of the invention uses the type(2) of the syntax priority rule and the interpretation of the syntaxpriority rule uses the type (1). As mentioned above, the rules areredundant and the learning is partially wasteful. However, such a typeselection is advantageous in that it is not required to change the typeof the syntax priority rule and the learning method if theinterpretation of the syntax priority rule is changed into the type (2).

According to the aforementioned method, the syntax priority rule isdetermined on the binary result of "to rank first or not". However, ifthe syntax priority rule may the interpretation of the type (2), theternary result is made possible.

Further, it is possible to define a numerical value of the prioritystrength for indicating "a rank stage" in addition to "to rank first ornot" and to define the rank stage of the parsing trees according to thesyntax priority rules. This results in making it possible to do thehigh-level interpretation, that is, determine which of the parsing treesto rank first if the priority syntaxes are competing in the buffer.

Such syntax priority rules are listed in Table 6.

                  TABLE 6    ______________________________________    (y21) Noun Phrase (Noun Phrase (Noun Phrase + Preposition    Phrase (Preposition + Noun Phrase)) + Equivalent    Conjunction + Noun Phrase (Noun Phrase + Preposition    Phrase))--> 2.0    (y22) Noun Phrase (Noun Phrase + Preposition Phrase    (Preposition + Noun Phrase (Noun Phrase + Equivalent    Conjunction + Noun Phrase (Noun Phrase + Preposition    Phrase)))) --> 1.2    (y23) Noun Phrase (Noun Phrase + Preposition Phrase    (Preposition + Noun Phrase (Noun Phrase (Noun Phrase +    Equivalent Conjunction + Noun Phrase) + Preposition Phrase)))    --> 0.5    ______________________________________

In the syntax priority rules listed in the Table 6, the numerical valueindicated in the right hand of is a magnification value. If it is largerthan 1, the syntax takes precedence. As the value is made larger, moreprecedence is taken for the syntax. Further, as in the syntax priorityrule indicated by (y23) of Table 6, if the numerical value is smallerthan 1, the syntax does not take precedence. The precedence is loweredcompared with no syntax priority rule.

To distinguish the syntax priority rules listed in the Table 4 from therules listed in the Table 5, the magnification values are represented byadding a decimal point if they are integers as listed in (y21) of Table6.

According to this embodiment of the invention, the syntax priority islearned when the user selects the translated sentence outputted from thetranslation machine for the second time or later without selecting thesentence outputted for the first time. This is because the user's changeof the translated sentence output ted for the first time from thetranslation machine means the user's dissatisfaction to the syntaxpriority rules of the translation machine. Hence, the user inevitablyhas a larger desire for learning the syntax priority.

However, this invention is not limited to this embodiment. If thetranslated sentence outputted for the first time from the translationmachine is selected by the user, the syntax on which the translatedsentence is generated is allowed to be learned. Further, each time theuser selects the translated sentence, the user may select whether or notthe syntax priority about the sentence is to be learned.

Further, this embodiment has been described to generate all the syntaxpriority rules through the effect of learning when the user uses thetranslation machine. However, the translation machine according to theinvention may prepare the ready-made syntax priority rules stored in thememory 106 shown in FIG. 39. If the syntax priority rules having theirscores are prepared in the translation machine, these scores are allowedto be changed by the learning operation. Or, those ready-made syntaxpriority rules are completely ignored or changed to give a precedence toanother parsing tree through the effect of learning.

The syntax priority rule listed in (y31) of Table 7 involves an incidentcondition "the fifth element is equal to the eleventh element in thesurface layer" in the left hand.

                  TABLE 7    ______________________________________    (y31) Noun Phrase (Noun Phrase (Noun Phrase + Preposition    Phrase (Preposition + Noun Phrase)) + Equivalent    Conjunction + Noun Phrase (Noun Phrase + Preposition    Phrase (Preposition + Noun Phrase)))    Incidental Condition: The fifth element is equal to the    eleventh element in the surface layer.    --> 1    ______________________________________

In addition to the syntax priority rules taking only the forms of theparsing tree composed of the terminal symbol and the non-terminal symbolranged in sequence, the information except them (surface layer, that is,word characters) is allowed to be included in the rules. This is also atransformation of the second embodiment.

In the incidental condition of the rule (y31) of the Table 7, the n-thelement (n is a natural number) indicates an n-th end or non-terminalsymbol sequentially counted from the left hand in the part except the"incidental condition" in the left hand of the rule, that is, the formof the parsing tree. Herein, a plus symbol and a parenthesis are ignoredwhen counting the indexes. Hence, in the rule (y31), the fifth and theeleventh elements means the "preposition".

To obtain such a syntax priority rule through the effect of learning, atthe learning time, it is considered that the translation machine promptsthe user to select the syntax. For example, as indicated by the rule(y31) of Table 7, assume that the coincide between the surface layers ofthe words is included in the syntax priority rule. In such a conditionas making it possible to learn it, that is, in such a condition ascoinciding the surface layer (characters) located at the non-terminalsymbol at an end of the partial parsing tree to be learned with thesurface layer (characters) located at the non-terminal symbol at anotherend of the same partial analyzing tree, to learn the rule for puttingpriority on that partial parsing tree, the translation machine asks theuser of whether or not the coincide between the surface layers isincluded in the rule and waits for a response from the user. If the userinputs the response indicating inclusion of the coincide between thesurface layers in the rule, the rule as indicated in the rule (y31) ofthe Table 7 is generated. Otherwise, the rule to be generated does notinclude the condition about the surface layer as mentioned above.

The learning method described about the embodiment of the invention isarranged to recognize as the syntax priority rule to be learned thepartial parsing tree of the different part except the common part to theparsing trees competing with each other. The method for defining theparsing tree to be built in the syntax priority rule is not limited tothis method. For example, the user specifies a certain portion in theoriginal sentence. The translation machine operates to learn the partialparsing tree corresponding to the specific portion. Or, the syntacticanalyzing tree itself is shown to the user in the form as shown in FIG.40 or another form so that the user may specify the portion to belearned.

in turn, the description will be oriented to a translation machineaccording to a third embodiment of the present invention.

Like the first and the second embodiments, the third embodiment is alsoarranged to execute the process of "morpheme analysis" to "syntacticanalysis" to "conversion" to "translated sentence generation" as shownin FIG. 3 about the first embodiment. Further, the concept of thearrangement is the basically same as that shown in FIG. 4.

In addition, the "semantic analysis" stage may be included after the"syntactic analysis".

FIG. 44 is a block diagram showing the concrete arrangement of thetranslation machine according to the third embodiment. It includes thesyntax priority interpretation on the assumption that the sourcelanguage is English and the target language is Japanese, like the firstand the second embodiments. The used example sentence is the same as thefirst and the second embodiments.

As shown in FIG. 44, the translation machine is arranged to have aninput unit 211, a syntax priority rule input unit 212 connected to theinput unit 211, a dictionary consulting and morphological analyzing unit213 connected to the input unit 211 and the syntax priority rule inputunit 212, a syntactic analyzing unit 214 connected to the dictionaryconsulting and morphological analyzing unit 213, a syntax priorityinterpretation unit 215 connected to the syntactic analyzing unit 214, asyntax converting unit 216 connected to the syntax priorityinterpretation unit 215, a translated sentence generating unit 217connected to the syntax converting unit 216, an output unit 218connected to the translated sentence generating unit 217, a storing unit219 commonly connected to the syntax priority rule input unit 212, thedictionary consulting and morphological analyzing unit 213, thesyntactic analyzing unit 214, the syntax priority interpretation unit215, the syntax converting unit 216 and the translated sentencegenerating unit 217, and an operation control unit 220 commonlyconnected to all the above units.

The storing unit 219 is arranged to have a dictionary memory 291, agrammatical rule memory 292, a tree structure converting rule memory293, a syntax priority interpretation rule memory 294, an originalsentence memory 295, a dictionary consulting memory 296, a syntax memory297, a buffer memory 298, and a pointer memory 299.

In a case that the fitness information about the syntax itself isutilized and two or more syntaxes are allowed to be built from oneoriginal sentence one by one or at one time, whether or not any of thesyntaxes is fitting may be defined independently of the content of thesentence. The translation machine according to the third embodimentenables to execute this determination, output only one translatedcounterpart for one original sentence at one time and output anothertranslated counterpart by the user's operation of the input unit.

In this embodiment, "fitness of the syntax itself" is referred to as"syntax priority" and selection of a fit syntax based on the syntaxpriority is referred to as "interpretation of syntax priority" or simply"priority interpretation". The syntax priority rule may be inputted tothe translation machine at any time if it is operative whether or notthe translation is done. To input the rule, the user defines thecorresponding operation through the input unit. With this operation, thecontrol operation unit 220 determines that the shift of the operatingstate to the state of inputting the syntax priority rule is indicated.Hence, the unit 220 operates to shift the state to the rule inputtingstate. When inputting the rule, the syntax priority rule input unit 212is used. The syntax priority rule is stored in the syntax priorityinterpretation rule memory 294.

Next, the description will be oriented to the operation of thetranslation machine shown in FIG. 44 as referring to FIGS. 45a and 45b.

At first, like the first and the second embodiments, an originalsentence of "I bought films for the camera and tapes for the VTR." isinputted through the input unit 211 and is stored in the originalsentence memory 295 (step P1). The original sentence memory 295corresponds to the buffer A shown in FIG. 4 included in the firstembodiment. Next, the dictionary consulting and morphological analyzingunit 218 serves to perform the morphological analysis about the contentof the original sentence memory 295 (buffer A in FIG. 4) by referringthe dictionary memory 291. The analyzed result is stored in thedictionary consulting memory 296 (step P2). The dictionary consultingmemory 296 corresponds to the buffer B shown in FIG. 4.

Then, the syntax memory 297 (buffer C in FIG. 4) storing the result ofsyntactic analysis is cleared (step P3). In succession, the pointer Pcis cleared (step P4). The pointer is a variable for indicating aspecific location on the memory or buffer.

In addition, each of the memories located in the storing unit 219 shownin FIG. 44 is not separated into fixed groups. Those memories occupytheir areas of the storing unit 219 depending on the input data state.Which area of the storing unit 219 corresponds to any of the memories ismanaged by the operation control unit 220 shown in FIG. 44.

The syntactic analyzing unit 214 serves to execute the syntacticanalysis about the original sentence as referring to the grammaticalrule memory 292. As a result, all the possible parsing trees are allowedto be built from the content of the dictionary consulting memory 296(buffer B in FIG. 4) and then are stored in the syntax memory 297(buffer C in FIG. 4) (step P5). When these parsing trees are derivedfrom the original sentence 2, the parsing trees composed by combiningthe tree shown in FIG. 46 with each of the trees shown in FIGS. 49 to 55are stored in the original sentence memory 295 (buffer A). When a newparsing tree is not further built from the content of the dictionaryconsulting memory 296 (buffer B in FIG. 4), the operation goes from thesteps P5 to P6.

If the flag variable Fc is set as 0 about each of the parsing treesstored in the syntax memory 297 (buffer C in FIG. 4), the syntaxpriority interpretation unit 215 serves to retrieve the syntax priorityinterpretation rule memory 294 for whether or not the matching syntaxpriority rule exists in the syntax priority interpretation rule memory294 (step P6).

In the description of this embodiment, the term "matching" between aparsing tree T1 and another syntax priority rule R1 means that the"priority" parsing tree indicated in the left hand of R1 (referred to asTR1) is the same as T1, T1 is larger than TR1 and the part of the TR1has the same structure as the overall T1. However, it does not mean thatthe TR1 is larger than T1 and the part of T1 has the same structure asthe overall TR1.

Further, the syntax memory 297 has an area for holding state informationabout whether or not each of the parsing trees has been selected, inaddition to an area for storing the data of the parsing tree itself.That is, each area is referred to as the flag variable Fc () accompaniedwith the parsing tree. The flag variable Fc () may take two values of 0,1 depending on the state. Hereafter, the flag variable Fc () accompaniedwith one of the parsing trees, T1, stored in the syntax memory 297(buffer C in FIG. 4), is referred to as Fc (T1).

As described above, when, at the step P3, the syntax memory 297 iscleared, all the flags Fc are cleared as zero. When the operationreaches the step P6 after the original sentence is inputted, about allthe parsing trees existing in the syntax memory 297 (buffer C in FIG.4), their flags Fc are cleared as zero.

this case, the matching between all the parsing trees stored in thesyntax memory 297 (buffer C in FIG. 4) and the syntax priority rules iscarried out. The syntax priority rule listed in Table 8 is inputted bythe user and is stored in the syntax priority interpretation rule memory294.

                  TABLE 8    ______________________________________    (y1) Noun Phrase (Noun Phrase (Noun Phrase + Preposition    Phrase (Preposition + *)) + Equivalent Conjunction + Noun    Phrase (Noun Phrase + Preposition Phrase (Preposition + *)))    Incidental Condition: The fifth element is equal to the    eleventh element in light of the surface layer.    --> 1    (y2) Verb Phrase (Verb + Noun Phrase (Noun Phrase +    Preposition Phrase (Preposition + Noun Phrase (Noun Phrase +    Equivalent Conjunction + Noun Phrase))) + Preposition    Phrase): Verb Phrase (Verb + Noun Phrase (Noun Phrase (Noun    Phrase + Preposition Phrase (Preposition + Noun Phrase)) +    Equivalent Conjunction + Noun Phrase (Noun Phrase +    Preposition Phrase)))    --> 2    ______________________________________

Of all the parsing trees stored in the syntax memory 297 (buffer C inFIG. 4), only the parsing tree as shown in FIG. 41 about the secondembodiment matches to the rule (y1) listed in the Table 8. This parsingtree is obtained by synthesizing the partial parsing trees shown inFIGS. 46 and 47 and will be referred to as the parsing tree Te.

It will be clearly understood from the comparison between FIG. 48 andFIG. 47 or 41 (about the second embodiment) that the parsing tree Tematches to the rule (y1) listed in the Table 8. Hence, as a result ofmatching at the step P6, the pointer Pc points to the parsing tree Te(step P7). When, therefore, the parsing tree Te and another tree Ty arecompeting with each other, the syntax priority rule allows the parsingtree Te to take precedence of the tree Ty.

Next, a value of 1 is set to the flag Fc (Te) accompanied with theparsing tree Te (step P9). The flag Fc with a value of 1 or more beingset thereto means that the parsing tree for the flag Fc has been sent tothe syntax converting unit 216, which corresponds to the convertingstage or later as shown in FIG. 3.

The parsing tree Te is sent to the syntax converting unit 216 (stepP10). The syntax converting unit corresponds to the converting unit 19in FIG. 3. The term "send" in the description of this embodiment is usedfor the information. Hence, the information does not disappear after itis sent from the buffer or the like. For example, in this case, theparsing tree Ta existing in the syntax memory 297 (buffer C in FIG. 4)is sent to the syntax converting unit 216. In actual, after being sent,the parsing tree Ta is kept stored in the syntax memory 297 (buffer C inFIG. 4) until the memory is cleared.

The syntax converting unit 216 serves to convert the parsing tree Te asreferring to the content of the tree structure converting rule memory293. The term "conversion" in the description of this embodiment is usedfor information like the term "send" After a certain piece ofinformation is converted, therefore, the piece of information is, inprinciple, kept unchanged.

Then, it is determined whether or not the parsing tree Te is convertedinto a proper counterpart in the syntax converting unit 216 (step P11).If not, the operation goes from the step P11 to the step P17, at whichit is determined whether or not the parsing trees accompanied with theflags Fc being set as 0 are left in the syntax memory 297 (memory C inFIG. 4) (step P17). If, at the step P17, no such a tree is left in thememory 297, it is determined that the translation of this sentencefails. If, at the step P17, yes, the operation returns to the step

At the step P10, the syntax converting unit 216 serves to convert theparsing tree Ta into the counterpart. Then, the operation goes from thestep P11 to the step P12, at which the parsing tree Te (converted) issent to the translated sentence generating unit 217, which correspondsto the unit 20 shown in FIG. 3.

At a step P13, it is determined whether or not a translated counterpartis derived from the parsing tree Te (converted) in the translatedsentence generating unit 217. If not, the operation goes to the step P13to the step P17, at which it is determined whether or not the parsingtrees accompanied with the flag Fc being set as 0 are left in the syntaxmemory 297 (buffer C in FIG. 4). If yes, the operation returns to thestep P6. If no, it is determined that the translation of this sentencefails.

At the step P13, the translated sentence generating unit 217 serves togenerate the translated sentence from the parsing tree Te (converted).Then, the operation goes from the step P13 to the step P14, at which thetranslated result of the parsing tree Te is outputted to the output unit218.

The translated counterpart "I bought (films for the camera) and (tapesfor the VTR)." (using parsing tree Te) outputted from the output unit218 is determined to be proper by the user. The user inputs thedetermined result from the input unit 211 at a step P15.

If, at the step P15, the user inputs an indication that the result isnot proper, the operation returns from the next step P16 to the stepP17. In actual, however, from a viewpoint of the present machinetranslating level, in many cases, the translated counterpart isconsidered to be proper. Hence, the user normally inputs the indicationthat the translated sentence is proper. According to the determinationat the step P15, the translation of this sentence is terminated.

As described above, since the syntax priority rules inputted by the userare stored in the memory, when two or more syntaxes are competing intranslating the original sentence, the translated counterpart based onthe proper syntax is allowed to be outputted for the first time. If suchrules are not stored, when translating the original sentence, adifferent tree from the tree Te as shown in FIG. 41 about the secondembodiment may be selected. In this case, the translated counterpartoutputted for the first time is another one "I bought films (for thecamera and tapes), for the VTR." which is determined to be improper bythe user.

In turn, the description has to be oriented to the basic concept of thetranslation machine according to the third embodiment, the grammaticalrules used in the machine, and the terms and meaning about the syntaxpriority rules. However, the description about them is substantiallysame as that according to the first embodiment. Hence, refer to thedescription about FIGS. 1 to 10 according to the first embodiment. Forreference, how the original sentence of "I bought films for the cameraand tapes for the VTR" is analyzed will be shown in FIGS. 47 and 49 to55, refer these figures as being compared with the description aboutFIGS. 1 to 10 of the first embodiment for more deeply understanding thesyntactic analysis based on the syntax priority rules.

It is, therefore, natural that the description jumps to a transformationof the third embodiment which treats the syntax priority rules in adifferent way from that of the first or the second embodiment.

The syntax priority rules to be treated in this embodiment are asfollows.

(A) Only the priority partial parsing tree is indicated. It means onlythe parsing tree shown in FIG. 47 is shown. This rule indicates the rule(y1) listed in the Table 8.

(B) The priority partial parsing tree and some other trees competingwith it are indicated. The priority partial parsing tree is flagged.About the foregoing third embodiment, some parsing trees such as treesshown in FIGS. 47 and 48 are indicated. The parsing tree shown in FIG.47 is indicated as ranking first. Such a rule is indicated in (y1) ofthe table 8.

Further, the method for interpreting the syntax priority rules may be asfollows.

(C) When competition of the syntaxes takes place, the parsing treematching to the partial parsing tree "ranking first" determinedaccording to the rule is determined to take precedence of any othertrees. The other trees competing in the buffer C (see FIG. 4) areequally treated as "not taking precedence".

In this case, if the generated syntax priority rule takes the type of(B), the description about any tree except the "priority" partialparsing tree is not useful. That is, the rule type (B) is redundant.However, this type (B) is advantageous in that no change of the form ofthe syntax priority rule is required if the interpretation of the syntaxpriority rule is changed into the type (D) to be described later.Conversely, the type (A) is disadvantageous in that the form of thesyntax priority rule is required if the interpretation is changed fromthe type (C) to the type (D).

(D) When the competition of the syntaxes takes place, the parsing treematching to the "priority" partial parsing tree is determined to rankfirst. About the other parsing trees competing in the buffer C (see FIG.4), the parsing tree not described in the rules is determined to ranknext. Further, the partial parsing trees matching to the parsing treedescribed in the rule except the "priority" tree are determined to ranklast. This method is meaningful when the syntax rule takes the type (B).

The third embodiment takes the type (A) as the syntax priority rule andthe type (C) as the interpretation of the syntax priority rule.

Next, the description will be oriented to another transformation of thisembodiment about quantizing the syntax priority rules.

With the foregoing method, the binary result of "to give a tree theprecedence or not" is determined according to the syntax priority rules.The interpretation type (D) of the rules makes it possible to take theternary result. On the other hand, a more high-level rankinginterpretation may take a method for defining a priority level of "whichrank the syntax is" with a numerical value, taking a difference of thepriority level according to the rules, and taking precedence of any ofthe syntaxes competing with each other along their higher ranks. Thesyntax priority rules for such a method are listed in the Table 9.

                  TABLE 9    ______________________________________    (y11) Noun Phrase (Noun Phrase (Noun Phrase + Preposition    Phrase (Preposition + Noun Phrase)) + Equivalent    Conjunction + Noun Phrase (Noun Phrase + Preposition    Phrase))    --> 2.0    (y12) Noun Phrase (Noun Phrase + Preposition Phrase    (Preposition + Noun Phrase (Noun Phrase + Equivalent    Conjunction + Noun Phrase (Noun Phrase + Preposition    Phrase))))    --> 1.2    (y13) Noun Phrase (Noun Phrase + Preposition Phrase    (Preposition + Noun Phrase (Noun Phrase (Noun Phrase +    Equivalent Conjunction - Noun Phrase + Preposition Phrase)))    --> 0.5    ______________________________________

In the syntax priority rules listed in the Table 9, the numerical valueindicated in the right hand of is a magnification value. If it is largerthan 1, the syntax takes precedence. As the value is made larger, moreprecedence is taken for the syntax. Further, as in the syntax priorityrule indicated by (y13) of Table 9, if the numerical value is smallerthan 1, the syntax does not take precedence.

To distinguish the syntax priority rules listed in the Table 8 from therules listed in the Table 9, the magnification values are represented byadding a decimal point if they are integers as listed in (y1) of Table9.

Next, the description will be oriented to a transformation of theembodiment which has another form of representation of the syntaxpriority rules.

In the third embodiment, the syntax priority rules are represented ascharacter trains as listed in the Tables 8 and 9. This representationmay not be used when inputting the syntax priority rules and displayingthe rules on the display device. For example, to represent the rule, theform of the parsing tree shown in FIG. 48 is shown as it is. Or, whenthe user inputs the rule, such a tree may be graphically depicted on thedisplay with the input unit fitted for the graphic depiction.

Next, the description will be oriented to a transformation of thisembodiment which prepares the ready-made syntax priority rules.

As described above, all the syntax priority rules in the translationmachine are inputted by the user. The translation machine may providethe syntax priority rules given by the manufacturer before the userinputs the rules. The syntax priority rules are stored in the syntaxpriority interpretation rule memory 294 (see FIG. 44). If the syntaxpriority rules with the corresponding scores are prepared in thetranslation machine, the user may change these scores. Or, in any case,the user may change the ready-made rules so that all the ready-maderules may be ignored or a completely different tree may be selected.

If the user desires to change the ready-made rules, it is possible toemploy the method for keeping those rules unchanged. For example, theready-made rules are stored in one memory and the changed rules arestored in another memory. Or, both of them are stored in thecorresponding regions of one memory so that both of them may be combinedas one for reference.

Further, the translation machine may be arranged to have a function ofautomatically generating the syntax priority rule in the translatingprocess. In this case, if the translation machine makes it possible tomodify the rule, this machine belongs to the invention.

According to the third embodiment, therefore, as a syntax-analyzedresult, two or more syntaxes are outputted one by one or at one time.Then, which of the syntaxes are the most approximate is determinedaccording to the rules given by the user. With this operation, the userhaving a sufficient grammatical knowledge may reflect his or herknowledge on the machine translation so that a better translatedsentence may be more easily outputted in the precedence order.

Many widely different embodiments of the present invention may beconstructed without departing from the spirit and scope of the presentinvention. It should be understood that the present invention is notlimited to the specific embodiments described in the specification,except as defined in the appended claims.

What is claimed is:
 1. A translation machine for translating an originalsentence of a source language into a translated sentence of a targetlanguage, comprising:storing means for storing a syntax priority rule ofsaid source language, including partial structures of said sourcelanguage, numerical values each indicating a priority of one of saidpartial structures, and incidental conditions of each of said partialstructures; a translation module for translating said original sentenceinto a plurality of sentences of said target language having differentsyntactic structures, respectively, said translation moduleincludingstructure deriving means for deriving a plurality of syntacticstructures of said original sentence based on said partial structuresand said incidental condition, and priority deriving means for derivingpriority magnitudes of said plurality of syntactic structuresrespectively, based on said numerical values; and control means forperforming a control to output one of said plurality of sentences ofsaid target language as said translated sentence, in accordance withsaid priority magnitudes.
 2. A translation machine according to claim 1,wherein said translation module further includes first analyzing meansfor analyzing said original sentence morphologically by means of adictionary.
 3. A translation machine according to claim 2, wherein saidtranslation module further includes second analyzing means for analyzingsaid original sentence syntactically and selecting a plurality ofparsing trees of said original sentence each corresponding to one ofsaid syntactic structures by means of said dictionary and grammaticalrules based on a result of said first analyzing means.
 4. A translationmachine according to claim 3, wherein said translation module furtherincludes converting means for converting each of said parsing trees ofsaid original sentence into equivalent parsing trees of said targetlanguage, respectively, by means of a tree structure conversion rules.5. A translation machine according to claim 4, wherein said translationmodule further includes sentence generating means for generating each ofsaid plurality of sentences of said target language by adding a properparticle or a proper auxiliary verb to a result of said convertingmeans, respectively.
 6. A translation machine for translating anoriginal sentence of a source language into a translated sentence of atarget language, comprising:morphological analyzing unit for dividing aninputted sentence into morphemes by means of a dictionary and obtainingparts of speech of said morphemes; syntactic analyzing unit foranalyzing the syntax of said morphemes divided by said morphologicalanalyzing unit and for outputting a corresponding syntactic structure ofsaid inputted sentence by means of said dictionary and grammaticalrules; converting unit for converting said syntactic structure of saidinputted sentence into a syntactic structure of said target language;and translated sentence generating unit for generating said translatedsentence based on said syntactic structure of said target languageobtained by said converting unit,wherein said translation machinefurther comprises: obtaining means for obtaining a plurality ofsyntactic structures of said inputted sentence, when said syntacticanalyzing unit analyses said inputted sentence corresponding to aplurality of syntactic structures; syntax storing means for storing saidsyntactic structures obtained by said obtaining means, selecting meansfor selecting one of said syntactic structures stored in said syntaxstoring means through input means operated by a user; priority rulegenerating means for generating a priority rule of syntactic structuresof said source language of one sentence or a part thereof based onresults of said selecting means; priority storing means for storing saidpriority rule generated by said priority rule generating means and anindex indicating a selection data of said selecting means; evaluatingmeans for assigning an evaluating value to each of said syntacticstructures based on said priority rule stored in said priority storingmeans; and control means for controlling said evaluating means, saidconverting unit and said translated sentence generating unit to output atranslated sentence corresponding to one of said syntactic structures ofsaid inputted sentence, based on said evaluating value.
 7. A translationmachine according to claim 6, wherein said syntax priority rules arebased on a priority of a plurality of partial parsing trees.
 8. Atranslation machine according to claim 7, wherein said priority storingmeans stores rejection data of each of said parsing trees, and saidsyntax priority rules are based on a priority of said parsing trees andsaid rejection data.
 9. A translation machine according to claim 7,wherein said storing means stores rejection/selection data of each ofsaid parsing trees, and said syntax priority rules are based on apriority of said parsing trees and said rejection/selection data.